Aye Y'all Know Hillary Clinton is Trash Right?

[xxCivicxx]

I've yet to see any viable alternatives as to what exactly not voting will accomplish...and anyone who thinks a Trump presidency wouldn't do far more harm than Hilary is very misinformed. I've yet to see anyone say Hilary is perfect and her flaws are very well known but to pretend as if it will make no difference between her running the country vs Trump is where you expose your own ignorance

What sense does it make to keep going for the status quo?

In any other instance I'm all for challenging the status quo...but when the alternative is 4 years under Trump many find that risk not with taking

Again, your entire argument in favor of hillary has nothing to do with her or her policies

You've been programmed to think trump whenever someone mentions hillary's past

You are literally brainwashed

Because it's a binary choice dude. It has nothing to do with "brainwashing."

It's not a binary choice

The fact that you think it is is proof of your brainwashing

Either Clinton or Trump will win the presidency. Two choices. A one or a zero. That's the definition of a binary choice.

You don't decide who becomes president, the electoral college does

You show faith in the system by participating in voting

Your choice in whether to participate or not is not binary

And who decides how the electoral college votes? Also, participating or not is also a binary choice. Any yes or no or choice or 1 thing out of 2 possible choices is by DEFINITION binary.

The electoral college decides how the electoral college votes

You're confusing yourself

 

[smp4life]

I personally havent seen anything from Hillary thats so bad. I dont agree with her on everything. She simply appears to be the better option. Its not even close. Its laughable that they would even put dude up as a candidate and the other option. Like does someone think people are complete and utter spectacular idiots?I mean come on. Dude blatantly insults people tell people to go fck themselves wants stop and frisk for people of color nationwide even though crime is at historic lows. The markets tank at any hint of him rising in the slightest way in any poll because everybody knows he is a disaster. This isnt brain surgery.

@Stiff, Posting all those facts about crooked Hillary, then saying you'll still PROBABLY vote for her is a microcosm of why NEITHER party takes us seriously. You have all the facts in order to make an INFORMED decision. Yet fear, emotion, and irrational assumptions about "doomsday scenarios", IN YOUR MIND about the other candidate make you, and the vast majority of black people to swallow the blue pill.

Throw in some fear, mixed with low-brow pandering ads (Barbershop video) go speak in a black church in the black community. That's the template to herd the black vote like cattle.

Switch up your cadence so your inflection in tone has a tinge of Ebonics in it. Propose shit that you know want get passed (20 billion dollars for HBCU'S) as low-hanging fruit niggas can latch on too.

There's no way I could, in good conscious, vote for a person that did HALF the shit you posted. I wouldn't be able to look my Haitian brothers in the eye. A vote for her is a ringing endorsement of EVERYTHING she's done in her 30 years of public service.

Are you okay with that?

I can see past the thinly-veiled argument of "I'm voting for Hillary, to stop Trump." By that logic, I'm advocating for more cops in inner-city communities to stop black on black crime. Who gives a rat's ass if it leads to MORE pigs killing unarmed black men.

I'm choosing between the lesser of "two evils." More cops=more police shootings, less cops=more black on black crime........

Pick your poison. Isn't that the justification you guys use?

My questions is.......Why even attempt to drink the poison. Common sense says when you have two bad choices, you don't pick any.

Don't vote.

#SitThisOneOut

No drawn out "justifications" are needed. If you make the personal choice not to vote thats your business. Reasons for voting are simple. To actually do something instead of passively doing noting to prevent who you don't want to be in office. Doing nothing would increasing the likelyhood of an outcome that is not in your best interest. Its not brain surgery.Not voting is a non starter. People can try to justify it but its useless. Dont know why people who are not involved in the process think they have anything to say about it. Actually they dont. Not being in the game is nothing. Your not in it. But its all personal preference and choice.

Yes the powers that be do think and know the majority of people is the country are spectacular idiots.

Wouldn't you when both democrat and republican voters go through the same song and dance every election cycle talking change this and change that but end the end always doing the same exact shit but expecting different results.

Which is the definition of insanity. So why wouldn't they think the majority are spectacular fucking idiots?

It could be construed that way if a. I didnt think there was a stark and obvious choice between the candidates (I see clear differences) and b. I expected something different from politicians or Presidents than what they are. I dont expect anyone to save me. Nor do I expect to agree with any of them on everything. Usually I dont vote but this time the choice is so ludicrously clear. The President effects economics and world affairs among other things. It makes a difference who it is thats simply the truth. But thats probably enough political talk from me for the day. Its more of an action thing for me at this point. Anyway we'll see tomorrow...

What are the differences?

Are you serious? Pick up a paper once in a while.

Deflection

I asked you specifically

minimum wage hikes

pro-choice rights

funding for women's healthcare

taxing those that make over $250k instead of everyone

less privatized prison

less privatization of other public goods

Continuation of Obama-care

Is that enough for you?

I'm not sure what you're responding to, the question was what are the differences between the 2 current candidates

Clinton and Trump have vast differing opinions on the above issues. You're obviously being obtuse for some reason.

Another deflection

You consistently make statements that you can't support with facts, so this is no surprise

Please just ignore my posts until you can answer my simple questions

I answered them twice you dunce. Ignore my posts if you can't read properly. You dyslexic or what?

Control your emotions hillary extremist

Please point me to the post where you answered my question?

So silly. Go ahead and sit home and not vote.

 

[xxCivicxx]

I personally havent seen anything from Hillary thats so bad. I dont agree with her on everything. She simply appears to be the better option. Its not even close. Its laughable that they would even put dude up as a candidate and the other option. Like does someone think people are complete and utter spectacular idiots?I mean come on. Dude blatantly insults people tell people to go fck themselves wants stop and frisk for people of color nationwide even though crime is at historic lows. The markets tank at any hint of him rising in the slightest way in any poll because everybody knows he is a disaster. This isnt brain surgery.

@Stiff, Posting all those facts about crooked Hillary, then saying you'll still PROBABLY vote for her is a microcosm of why NEITHER party takes us seriously. You have all the facts in order to make an INFORMED decision. Yet fear, emotion, and irrational assumptions about "doomsday scenarios", IN YOUR MIND about the other candidate make you, and the vast majority of black people to swallow the blue pill.

Throw in some fear, mixed with low-brow pandering ads (Barbershop video) go speak in a black church in the black community. That's the template to herd the black vote like cattle.

Switch up your cadence so your inflection in tone has a tinge of Ebonics in it. Propose shit that you know want get passed (20 billion dollars for HBCU'S) as low-hanging fruit niggas can latch on too.

There's no way I could, in good conscious, vote for a person that did HALF the shit you posted. I wouldn't be able to look my Haitian brothers in the eye. A vote for her is a ringing endorsement of EVERYTHING she's done in her 30 years of public service.

Are you okay with that?

I can see past the thinly-veiled argument of "I'm voting for Hillary, to stop Trump." By that logic, I'm advocating for more cops in inner-city communities to stop black on black crime. Who gives a rat's ass if it leads to MORE pigs killing unarmed black men.

I'm choosing between the lesser of "two evils." More cops=more police shootings, less cops=more black on black crime........

Pick your poison. Isn't that the justification you guys use?

My questions is.......Why even attempt to drink the poison. Common sense says when you have two bad choices, you don't pick any.

Don't vote.

#SitThisOneOut

No drawn out "justifications" are needed. If you make the personal choice not to vote thats your business. Reasons for voting are simple. To actually do something instead of passively doing noting to prevent who you don't want to be in office. Doing nothing would increasing the likelyhood of an outcome that is not in your best interest. Its not brain surgery.Not voting is a non starter. People can try to justify it but its useless. Dont know why people who are not involved in the process think they have anything to say about it. Actually they dont. Not being in the game is nothing. Your not in it. But its all personal preference and choice.

Yes the powers that be do think and know the majority of people is the country are spectacular idiots.

Wouldn't you when both democrat and republican voters go through the same song and dance every election cycle talking change this and change that but end the end always doing the same exact shit but expecting different results.

Which is the definition of insanity. So why wouldn't they think the majority are spectacular fucking idiots?

It could be construed that way if a. I didnt think there was a stark and obvious choice between the candidates (I see clear differences) and b. I expected something different from politicians or Presidents than what they are. I dont expect anyone to save me. Nor do I expect to agree with any of them on everything. Usually I dont vote but this time the choice is so ludicrously clear. The President effects economics and world affairs among other things. It makes a difference who it is thats simply the truth. But thats probably enough political talk from me for the day. Its more of an action thing for me at this point. Anyway we'll see tomorrow...

What are the differences?

Are you serious? Pick up a paper once in a while.

Deflection

I asked you specifically

minimum wage hikes

pro-choice rights

funding for women's healthcare

taxing those that make over $250k instead of everyone

less privatized prison

less privatization of other public goods

Continuation of Obama-care

Is that enough for you?

I'm not sure what you're responding to, the question was what are the differences between the 2 current candidates

Clinton and Trump have vast differing opinions on the above issues. You're obviously being obtuse for some reason.

Another deflection

You consistently make statements that you can't support with facts, so this is no surprise

Please just ignore my posts until you can answer my simple questions

I answered them twice you dunce. Ignore my posts if you can't read properly. You dyslexic or what?

Control your emotions hillary extremist

Please point me to the post where you answered my question?

So silly. Go ahead and sit home and not vote.

More deflections smh

Where are all the thinkers?

 

[Stiff]

I've yet to see any viable alternatives as to what exactly not voting will accomplish...and anyone who thinks a Trump presidency wouldn't do far more harm than Hilary is very misinformed. I've yet to see anyone say Hilary is perfect and her flaws are very well known but to pretend as if it will make no difference between her running the country vs Trump is where you expose your own ignorance

What sense does it make to keep going for the status quo?

In any other instance I'm all for challenging the status quo...but when the alternative is 4 years under Trump many find that risk not with taking

Again, your entire argument in favor of hillary has nothing to do with her or her policies

You've been programmed to think trump whenever someone mentions hillary's past

You are literally brainwashed

Because it's a binary choice dude. It has nothing to do with "brainwashing."

It's not a binary choice

The fact that you think it is is proof of your brainwashing

Either Clinton or Trump will win the presidency. Two choices. A one or a zero. That's the definition of a binary choice.

You don't decide who becomes president, the electoral college does

You show faith in the system by participating in voting

Your choice in whether to participate or not is not binary

And who decides how the electoral college votes? Also, participating or not is also a binary choice. Any yes or no or choice or 1 thing out of 2 possible choices is by DEFINITION binary.

The electoral college decides how the electoral college votes

You're confusing yourself

Nah the electoral college goes off of the popular vote of the state. There's never been an instance in American history where the popular vote of a state went with one candidate and the electoral college said nah we going a different way. ONE or TWO single voters in the electoral college might try to vote a different way on some "protest" shit but it has never swayed the election.

People always point to the Bush vs Gore election...but that was a case where the popular vote NATIONALLY went to Gore but the way the math worked out with the individual states and their votes, Bush got more electoral votes (even though that's only because Gore didn't press the issue with Florida and if he had he would have won)

 

[xxCivicxx]

I've yet to see any viable alternatives as to what exactly not voting will accomplish...and anyone who thinks a Trump presidency wouldn't do far more harm than Hilary is very misinformed. I've yet to see anyone say Hilary is perfect and her flaws are very well known but to pretend as if it will make no difference between her running the country vs Trump is where you expose your own ignorance

What sense does it make to keep going for the status quo?

In any other instance I'm all for challenging the status quo...but when the alternative is 4 years under Trump many find that risk not with taking

Again, your entire argument in favor of hillary has nothing to do with her or her policies

You've been programmed to think trump whenever someone mentions hillary's past

You are literally brainwashed

Because it's a binary choice dude. It has nothing to do with "brainwashing."

It's not a binary choice

The fact that you think it is is proof of your brainwashing

Either Clinton or Trump will win the presidency. Two choices. A one or a zero. That's the definition of a binary choice.

You don't decide who becomes president, the electoral college does

You show faith in the system by participating in voting

Your choice in whether to participate or not is not binary

And who decides how the electoral college votes? Also, participating or not is also a binary choice. Any yes or no or choice or 1 thing out of 2 possible choices is by DEFINITION binary.

The electoral college decides how the electoral college votes

You're confusing yourself

Nah the electoral college goes off of the popular vote of the state. There's never been an instance in American history where the popular vote of a state went with one candidate and the electoral college said nah we going a different way. ONE or TWO single voters in the electoral college might try to vote a different way on some "protest" shit but it has never swayed the election.

People always point to the Bush vs Gore election...but that was a case where the popular vote NATIONALLY went to Gore but the way the math worked out with the individual states and their votes, Bush got more electoral votes (even though that's only because Gore didn't press the issue with Florida and if he had he would have won)

Lol you literally just contradicted yourself in your post

The popular vote has nothing to do with the electoral vote

The electorate normally vote with the popular vote so as to avoid revolts and keep the masses docile, but they are not obligated to vote how the people vote

Bush lost the popular vote by 2 million and became president. No matter how you want to slice it, the fact remains that you saw the irrelevancy of the popular vote in your own lifetime

 

[not_osirus_jenkins]

I've yet to see any viable alternatives as to what exactly not voting will accomplish...and anyone who thinks a Trump presidency wouldn't do far more harm than Hilary is very misinformed. I've yet to see anyone say Hilary is perfect and her flaws are very well known but to pretend as if it will make no difference between her running the country vs Trump is where you expose your own ignorance

What sense does it make to keep going for the status quo?

In any other instance I'm all for challenging the status quo...but when the alternative is 4 years under Trump many find that risk not with taking

Again, your entire argument in favor of hillary has nothing to do with her or her policies

You've been programmed to think trump whenever someone mentions hillary's past

You are literally brainwashed

Because it's a binary choice dude. It has nothing to do with "brainwashing."

It's not a binary choice

The fact that you think it is is proof of your brainwashing

Either Clinton or Trump will win the presidency. Two choices. A one or a zero. That's the definition of a binary choice.

You don't decide who becomes president, the electoral college does

You show faith in the system by participating in voting

Your choice in whether to participate or not is not binary

And who decides how the electoral college votes? Also, participating or not is also a binary choice. Any yes or no or choice or 1 thing out of 2 possible choices is by DEFINITION binary.

The electoral college decides how the electoral college votes

You're confusing yourself

Nah the electoral college goes off of the popular vote of the state. There's never been an instance in American history where the popular vote of a state went with one candidate and the electoral college said nah we going a different way. ONE or TWO single voters in the electoral college might try to vote a different way on some "protest" shit but it has never swayed the election.

People always point to the Bush vs Gore election...but that was a case where the popular vote NATIONALLY went to Gore but the way the math worked out with the individual states and their votes, Bush got more electoral votes (even though that's only because Gore didn't press the issue with Florida and if he had he would have won)

Lol you literally just contradicted yourself in your post

The popular vote has nothing to do with the electoral vote

The electorate normally vote with the popular vote so as to avoid revolts and keep the masses docile, but they are not obligated to vote how the people vote

Bush lost the popular vote by 2 million and became president. No matter how you want to slice it, the fact remains that you saw the irrelevancy of the popular vote in your own lifetime

'normally' and 'has always' are completely different. Never in the history of the us has the electorate gon against the popular vote, never. SO don't say normally.

 

[Stiff]

I've yet to see any viable alternatives as to what exactly not voting will accomplish...and anyone who thinks a Trump presidency wouldn't do far more harm than Hilary is very misinformed. I've yet to see anyone say Hilary is perfect and her flaws are very well known but to pretend as if it will make no difference between her running the country vs Trump is where you expose your own ignorance

What sense does it make to keep going for the status quo?

In any other instance I'm all for challenging the status quo...but when the alternative is 4 years under Trump many find that risk not with taking

Again, your entire argument in favor of hillary has nothing to do with her or her policies

You've been programmed to think trump whenever someone mentions hillary's past

You are literally brainwashed

Because it's a binary choice dude. It has nothing to do with "brainwashing."

It's not a binary choice

The fact that you think it is is proof of your brainwashing

Either Clinton or Trump will win the presidency. Two choices. A one or a zero. That's the definition of a binary choice.

You don't decide who becomes president, the electoral college does

You show faith in the system by participating in voting

Your choice in whether to participate or not is not binary

And who decides how the electoral college votes? Also, participating or not is also a binary choice. Any yes or no or choice or 1 thing out of 2 possible choices is by DEFINITION binary.

The electoral college decides how the electoral college votes

You're confusing yourself

Nah the electoral college goes off of the popular vote of the state. There's never been an instance in American history where the popular vote of a state went with one candidate and the electoral college said nah we going a different way. ONE or TWO single voters in the electoral college might try to vote a different way on some "protest" shit but it has never swayed the election.

People always point to the Bush vs Gore election...but that was a case where the popular vote NATIONALLY went to Gore but the way the math worked out with the individual states and their votes, Bush got more electoral votes (even though that's only because Gore didn't press the issue with Florida and if he had he would have won)

Lol you literally just contradicted yourself in your post

The popular vote has nothing to do with the electoral vote

The electorate normally vote with the popular vote so as to avoid revolts and keep the masses docile, but they are not obligated to vote how the people vote

Bush lost the popular vote by 2 million and became president. No matter how you want to slice it, the fact remains that you saw the irrelevancy of the popular vote in your own lifetime

The popular vote is irrelevant on a NATIONAL level. On a state level the popular vote is THE determining factor of how the state's electoral college vote goes. The electoral college has historically ALWAYS voted with the popular vote of its state with the exception of one or two "faithless electors" which are rare and don't ever sway the election.

 

[xxCivicxx]

I've yet to see any viable alternatives as to what exactly not voting will accomplish...and anyone who thinks a Trump presidency wouldn't do far more harm than Hilary is very misinformed. I've yet to see anyone say Hilary is perfect and her flaws are very well known but to pretend as if it will make no difference between her running the country vs Trump is where you expose your own ignorance

What sense does it make to keep going for the status quo?

In any other instance I'm all for challenging the status quo...but when the alternative is 4 years under Trump many find that risk not with taking

Again, your entire argument in favor of hillary has nothing to do with her or her policies

You've been programmed to think trump whenever someone mentions hillary's past

You are literally brainwashed

Because it's a binary choice dude. It has nothing to do with "brainwashing."

It's not a binary choice

The fact that you think it is is proof of your brainwashing

Either Clinton or Trump will win the presidency. Two choices. A one or a zero. That's the definition of a binary choice.

You don't decide who becomes president, the electoral college does

You show faith in the system by participating in voting

Your choice in whether to participate or not is not binary

And who decides how the electoral college votes? Also, participating or not is also a binary choice. Any yes or no or choice or 1 thing out of 2 possible choices is by DEFINITION binary.

The electoral college decides how the electoral college votes

You're confusing yourself

Nah the electoral college goes off of the popular vote of the state. There's never been an instance in American history where the popular vote of a state went with one candidate and the electoral college said nah we going a different way. ONE or TWO single voters in the electoral college might try to vote a different way on some "protest" shit but it has never swayed the election.

People always point to the Bush vs Gore election...but that was a case where the popular vote NATIONALLY went to Gore but the way the math worked out with the individual states and their votes, Bush got more electoral votes (even though that's only because Gore didn't press the issue with Florida and if he had he would have won)

Lol you literally just contradicted yourself in your post

The popular vote has nothing to do with the electoral vote

The electorate normally vote with the popular vote so as to avoid revolts and keep the masses docile, but they are not obligated to vote how the people vote

Bush lost the popular vote by 2 million and became president. No matter how you want to slice it, the fact remains that you saw the irrelevancy of the popular vote in your own lifetime

'normally' and 'has always' are completely different. Never in the history of the us has the electorate gon against the popular vote, never. SO don't say normally.

Once again, incorrect

That's exactly what happened in 2000

 

[xxCivicxx]

I've yet to see any viable alternatives as to what exactly not voting will accomplish...and anyone who thinks a Trump presidency wouldn't do far more harm than Hilary is very misinformed. I've yet to see anyone say Hilary is perfect and her flaws are very well known but to pretend as if it will make no difference between her running the country vs Trump is where you expose your own ignorance

What sense does it make to keep going for the status quo?

In any other instance I'm all for challenging the status quo...but when the alternative is 4 years under Trump many find that risk not with taking

Again, your entire argument in favor of hillary has nothing to do with her or her policies

You've been programmed to think trump whenever someone mentions hillary's past

You are literally brainwashed

Because it's a binary choice dude. It has nothing to do with "brainwashing."

It's not a binary choice

The fact that you think it is is proof of your brainwashing

Either Clinton or Trump will win the presidency. Two choices. A one or a zero. That's the definition of a binary choice.

You don't decide who becomes president, the electoral college does

You show faith in the system by participating in voting

Your choice in whether to participate or not is not binary

And who decides how the electoral college votes? Also, participating or not is also a binary choice. Any yes or no or choice or 1 thing out of 2 possible choices is by DEFINITION binary.

The electoral college decides how the electoral college votes

You're confusing yourself

Nah the electoral college goes off of the popular vote of the state. There's never been an instance in American history where the popular vote of a state went with one candidate and the electoral college said nah we going a different way. ONE or TWO single voters in the electoral college might try to vote a different way on some "protest" shit but it has never swayed the election.

People always point to the Bush vs Gore election...but that was a case where the popular vote NATIONALLY went to Gore but the way the math worked out with the individual states and their votes, Bush got more electoral votes (even though that's only because Gore didn't press the issue with Florida and if he had he would have won)

Lol you literally just contradicted yourself in your post

The popular vote has nothing to do with the electoral vote

The electorate normally vote with the popular vote so as to avoid revolts and keep the masses docile, but they are not obligated to vote how the people vote

Bush lost the popular vote by 2 million and became president. No matter how you want to slice it, the fact remains that you saw the irrelevancy of the popular vote in your own lifetime

The popular vote is irrelevant on a NATIONAL level. On a state level the popular vote is THE determining factor of how the state's electoral college vote goes. The electoral college has historically ALWAYS voted with the popular vote of its state with the exception of one or two "faithless electors" which are rare and don't ever sway the election.

You're agreeing with me so I'm not sure these posts are about

And once again, saying "always" and then "with the exception" is a contradiction

And once again, the electoral college is not OBLIGATED to vote how the people vote

And once again, they do so only to keep the facade/ritual going

 

[TheGOAT]

So who am i supposed to vote for?

DJ Paul said hes writing in Kanye West

 

[Stiff]

I've yet to see any viable alternatives as to what exactly not voting will accomplish...and anyone who thinks a Trump presidency wouldn't do far more harm than Hilary is very misinformed. I've yet to see anyone say Hilary is perfect and her flaws are very well known but to pretend as if it will make no difference between her running the country vs Trump is where you expose your own ignorance

What sense does it make to keep going for the status quo?

In any other instance I'm all for challenging the status quo...but when the alternative is 4 years under Trump many find that risk not with taking

Again, your entire argument in favor of hillary has nothing to do with her or her policies

You've been programmed to think trump whenever someone mentions hillary's past

You are literally brainwashed

Because it's a binary choice dude. It has nothing to do with "brainwashing."

It's not a binary choice

The fact that you think it is is proof of your brainwashing

Either Clinton or Trump will win the presidency. Two choices. A one or a zero. That's the definition of a binary choice.

You don't decide who becomes president, the electoral college does

You show faith in the system by participating in voting

Your choice in whether to participate or not is not binary

And who decides how the electoral college votes? Also, participating or not is also a binary choice. Any yes or no or choice or 1 thing out of 2 possible choices is by DEFINITION binary.

The electoral college decides how the electoral college votes

You're confusing yourself

Nah the electoral college goes off of the popular vote of the state. There's never been an instance in American history where the popular vote of a state went with one candidate and the electoral college said nah we going a different way. ONE or TWO single voters in the electoral college might try to vote a different way on some "protest" shit but it has never swayed the election.

People always point to the Bush vs Gore election...but that was a case where the popular vote NATIONALLY went to Gore but the way the math worked out with the individual states and their votes, Bush got more electoral votes (even though that's only because Gore didn't press the issue with Florida and if he had he would have won)

Lol you literally just contradicted yourself in your post

The popular vote has nothing to do with the electoral vote

The electorate normally vote with the popular vote so as to avoid revolts and keep the masses docile, but they are not obligated to vote how the people vote

Bush lost the popular vote by 2 million and became president. No matter how you want to slice it, the fact remains that you saw the irrelevancy of the popular vote in your own lifetime

The popular vote is irrelevant on a NATIONAL level. On a state level the popular vote is THE determining factor of how the state's electoral college vote goes. The electoral college has historically ALWAYS voted with the popular vote of its state with the exception of one or two "faithless electors" which are rare and don't ever sway the election.

You're agreeing with me so I'm not sure these posts are about

And once again, saying "always" and then "with the exception" is a contradiction

And once again, the electoral college is not OBLIGATED to vote how the people vote

And once again, they do so only to keep the facade/ritual going

What you appear to be saying is that the popular vote is irrelevant and the electoral college decides the election. You're pointing to the 2000 election to support your argument.

What I'm telling you is that the popular vote on a STATE level is what determines who gets the electoral college votes for that state. And the whole "always" and "with exception" hang up is basically this:

If California has 55 electoral points and Candidate A wins the popular vote in California, then candidate A is entitled to 55 electoral points. When it's time for the ceremonial vote casting of the electors one of the 55 electors says "ahh fuck it I'm writing in my mom" then sure Candidate A will technically will only get 54 votes from California but it will be inconsequential. There's NEVER in the history of the country been an instance where a state's entire electoral college decided to flip against the popular vote of its state. To state that the electoral college is not obligated to vote how the people vote is to argue hypotheticals with no historical precedent.

 

[Stiff]

If you can find post where i pledge some undying love for Hillary go get the tape.. till then stop with the bs

@playmaker88

we had this exchange back in March during the primaries

Me I'm working/lower-middle class so I support Sanders. It's just that simple. He's the candidate that I feel represents my interests.

Im supporting Hillary and we are in the same strata.

Me I'm working/lower-middle class so I support Sanders. It's just that simple. He's the candidate that I feel represents my interests.

Im supporting Hillary and we are in the same strata.

May I ask why?

Me I'm working/lower-middle class so I support Sanders. It's just that simple. He's the candidate that I feel represents my interests.

Im supporting Hillary and we are in the same strata.

May I ask why?

Cuz Bill Clinton was on Arsenio

Because

She is polished, accomplished, prepared,experienced and diverse. Also she will continue and potentially improve upon the policies of the Obama administration.

Now what Hillary doesn't do and has had a hard time doing and has said so herself she isn't a natural she doesn't connect to the people in the way that her Husband/Obama/ Sanders does.. However she is task oriented thats more important than some perceived warmth, likeability and pitch perfect tone.

Sanders has made her a better candidate shes forged through the fire via her battles and defense from the conservative movement. She has shown me alot, she is built Ford tough.. So i support her .. i dont fan her.

You don't "fan" her but you definitely don't think she's trash. The point I'm arguing is...she's TRASH

 

[xxCivicxx]

I've yet to see any viable alternatives as to what exactly not voting will accomplish...and anyone who thinks a Trump presidency wouldn't do far more harm than Hilary is very misinformed. I've yet to see anyone say Hilary is perfect and her flaws are very well known but to pretend as if it will make no difference between her running the country vs Trump is where you expose your own ignorance

What sense does it make to keep going for the status quo?

In any other instance I'm all for challenging the status quo...but when the alternative is 4 years under Trump many find that risk not with taking

Again, your entire argument in favor of hillary has nothing to do with her or her policies

You've been programmed to think trump whenever someone mentions hillary's past

You are literally brainwashed

Because it's a binary choice dude. It has nothing to do with "brainwashing."

It's not a binary choice

The fact that you think it is is proof of your brainwashing

Either Clinton or Trump will win the presidency. Two choices. A one or a zero. That's the definition of a binary choice.

You don't decide who becomes president, the electoral college does

You show faith in the system by participating in voting

Your choice in whether to participate or not is not binary

And who decides how the electoral college votes? Also, participating or not is also a binary choice. Any yes or no or choice or 1 thing out of 2 possible choices is by DEFINITION binary.

The electoral college decides how the electoral college votes

You're confusing yourself

Nah the electoral college goes off of the popular vote of the state. There's never been an instance in American history where the popular vote of a state went with one candidate and the electoral college said nah we going a different way. ONE or TWO single voters in the electoral college might try to vote a different way on some "protest" shit but it has never swayed the election.

People always point to the Bush vs Gore election...but that was a case where the popular vote NATIONALLY went to Gore but the way the math worked out with the individual states and their votes, Bush got more electoral votes (even though that's only because Gore didn't press the issue with Florida and if he had he would have won)

Lol you literally just contradicted yourself in your post

The popular vote has nothing to do with the electoral vote

The electorate normally vote with the popular vote so as to avoid revolts and keep the masses docile, but they are not obligated to vote how the people vote

Bush lost the popular vote by 2 million and became president. No matter how you want to slice it, the fact remains that you saw the irrelevancy of the popular vote in your own lifetime

The popular vote is irrelevant on a NATIONAL level. On a state level the popular vote is THE determining factor of how the state's electoral college vote goes. The electoral college has historically ALWAYS voted with the popular vote of its state with the exception of one or two "faithless electors" which are rare and don't ever sway the election.

You're agreeing with me so I'm not sure these posts are about

And once again, saying "always" and then "with the exception" is a contradiction

And once again, the electoral college is not OBLIGATED to vote how the people vote

And once again, they do so only to keep the facade/ritual going

What you appear to be saying is that the popular vote is irrelevant and the electoral college decides the election. You're pointing to the 2000 election to support your argument.

What I'm telling you is that the popular vote on a STATE level is what determines who gets the electoral college votes for that state. And the whole "always" and "with exception" hang up is basically this:

If California has 55 electoral points and Candidate A wins the popular vote in California, then candidate A is entitled to 55 electoral points. When it's time for the ceremonial vote casting of the electors one of the 55 electors says "ahh fuck it I'm writing in my mom" then sure Candidate A will technically will only get 54 votes from California but it will be inconsequential. There's NEVER in the history of the country been an instance where a state's entire electoral college decided to flip against the popular vote of its state. To state that the electoral college is not obligated to vote how the people vote is to argue hypotheticals with no historical precedent.

And AGAIN, I REPEAT, Al Gore won the popular vote ON THE STATE BY STATE LEVEL

And AGAIN, I REPEAT, the electoral college did not vote the way of the popular vote

"Entitlement" and "obligation" are 2 completely different concepts. I'm not sure what you're arguing

I've already explained to you multiple times why the electoral college CHOOSES to vote with the people in most instances

The fact that the electoral college has not completely disregarded the popular vote yet is irrelevant. They have the power to, this is what you aren't understanding

 

[VIBE]

He understands it but there's not sufficient evidence to show that they wouldn't go w the popular vote today.

Can they go against it, sure, but he's saying it's not likely, not that it never has happened.

That was 16 years ago.

It hasn't happened since.

That's all he is saying.

 

[playmaker88]

If you can find post where i pledge some undying love for Hillary go get the tape.. till then stop with the bs

@playmaker88

we had this exchange back in March during the primaries

Me I'm working/lower-middle class so I support Sanders. It's just that simple. He's the candidate that I feel represents my interests.

Im supporting Hillary and we are in the same strata.

Me I'm working/lower-middle class so I support Sanders. It's just that simple. He's the candidate that I feel represents my interests.

Im supporting Hillary and we are in the same strata.

May I ask why?

Me I'm working/lower-middle class so I support Sanders. It's just that simple. He's the candidate that I feel represents my interests.

Im supporting Hillary and we are in the same strata.

May I ask why?

Cuz Bill Clinton was on Arsenio

Because

She is polished, accomplished, prepared,experienced and diverse. Also she will continue and potentially improve upon the policies of the Obama administration.

Now what Hillary doesn't do and has had a hard time doing and has said so herself she isn't a natural she doesn't connect to the people in the way that her Husband/Obama/ Sanders does.. However she is task oriented thats more important than some perceived warmth, likeability and pitch perfect tone.

Sanders has made her a better candidate shes forged through the fire via her battles and defense from the conservative movement. She has shown me alot, she is built Ford tough.. So i support her .. i dont fan her.

You don't "fan" her but you definitely don't think she's trash. The point I'm arguing is...she's TRASH

 

[Stiff]

I've yet to see any viable alternatives as to what exactly not voting will accomplish...and anyone who thinks a Trump presidency wouldn't do far more harm than Hilary is very misinformed. I've yet to see anyone say Hilary is perfect and her flaws are very well known but to pretend as if it will make no difference between her running the country vs Trump is where you expose your own ignorance

What sense does it make to keep going for the status quo?

In any other instance I'm all for challenging the status quo...but when the alternative is 4 years under Trump many find that risk not with taking

Again, your entire argument in favor of hillary has nothing to do with her or her policies

You've been programmed to think trump whenever someone mentions hillary's past

You are literally brainwashed

Because it's a binary choice dude. It has nothing to do with "brainwashing."

It's not a binary choice

The fact that you think it is is proof of your brainwashing

Either Clinton or Trump will win the presidency. Two choices. A one or a zero. That's the definition of a binary choice.

You don't decide who becomes president, the electoral college does

You show faith in the system by participating in voting

Your choice in whether to participate or not is not binary

And who decides how the electoral college votes? Also, participating or not is also a binary choice. Any yes or no or choice or 1 thing out of 2 possible choices is by DEFINITION binary.

The electoral college decides how the electoral college votes

You're confusing yourself

Nah the electoral college goes off of the popular vote of the state. There's never been an instance in American history where the popular vote of a state went with one candidate and the electoral college said nah we going a different way. ONE or TWO single voters in the electoral college might try to vote a different way on some "protest" shit but it has never swayed the election.

People always point to the Bush vs Gore election...but that was a case where the popular vote NATIONALLY went to Gore but the way the math worked out with the individual states and their votes, Bush got more electoral votes (even though that's only because Gore didn't press the issue with Florida and if he had he would have won)

Lol you literally just contradicted yourself in your post

The popular vote has nothing to do with the electoral vote

The electorate normally vote with the popular vote so as to avoid revolts and keep the masses docile, but they are not obligated to vote how the people vote

Bush lost the popular vote by 2 million and became president. No matter how you want to slice it, the fact remains that you saw the irrelevancy of the popular vote in your own lifetime

The popular vote is irrelevant on a NATIONAL level. On a state level the popular vote is THE determining factor of how the state's electoral college vote goes. The electoral college has historically ALWAYS voted with the popular vote of its state with the exception of one or two "faithless electors" which are rare and don't ever sway the election.

You're agreeing with me so I'm not sure these posts are about

And once again, saying "always" and then "with the exception" is a contradiction

And once again, the electoral college is not OBLIGATED to vote how the people vote

And once again, they do so only to keep the facade/ritual going

What you appear to be saying is that the popular vote is irrelevant and the electoral college decides the election. You're pointing to the 2000 election to support your argument.

What I'm telling you is that the popular vote on a STATE level is what determines who gets the electoral college votes for that state. And the whole "always" and "with exception" hang up is basically this:

If California has 55 electoral points and Candidate A wins the popular vote in California, then candidate A is entitled to 55 electoral points. When it's time for the ceremonial vote casting of the electors one of the 55 electors says "ahh fuck it I'm writing in my mom" then sure Candidate A will technically will only get 54 votes from California but it will be inconsequential. There's NEVER in the history of the country been an instance where a state's entire electoral college decided to flip against the popular vote of its state. To state that the electoral college is not obligated to vote how the people vote is to argue hypotheticals with no historical precedent.

And AGAIN, I REPEAT, Al Gore won the popular vote ON THE STATE BY STATE LEVEL

And AGAIN, I REPEAT, the electoral college did not vote the way of the popular vote

"Entitlement" and "obligation" are 2 completely different concepts. I'm not sure what you're arguing

I've already explained to you multiple times why the electoral college CHOOSES to vote with the people in most instances

The fact that the electoral college has not completely disregarded the popular vote yet is irrelevant. They have the power to, this is what you aren't understanding

Al Gore won the popular vote NATIONALLY. Absolutely. On a national level Al Gore received 540,000 more votes than George W. Bush.

What I'm saying is, the reason George W. Bush became president wasn't because the electoral college electors of any state saying "nah fuck it we want Bush". EVERY electoral college elector in that election went with the decision of the state's respective popular vote. The reason Bush got more electoral college votes was because of the way the math played out for how many votes each state was worth. So the hypothetical situation that you're pushing (a scenario where a candidate wins a state's popular vote but the electoral college bucks and goes with a different candidate) is not what happened in the 2000 election so it doesn't support your argument. America's presidential election is not a "nationwide" type of election. It goes state by state so it is mathematically possible (but rare, it's happened 4 times in the nation's history) that on a national level one candidate may get more votes than another candidate but still lose the presidency. But to say

The electoral college chooses the president, so your popular vote is literally you showing faith in the system and NOTHING ELSE

implies that the electoral college operates independently of the popular vote and that's just not true. In any given state if Candidate A gets more popular votes than Candidate B than the electoral college votes for that state are going to Candidate A..period. Sure they are NOT "obgligated" to vote the way the popular vote went..but the electors are APPOINTED by the candidates who won that state. The prospect of them all simultaneously bucking against the people that appointed them is minuscule and has no historical precedent.

 

[nujerz84]

Gore lost the popular vote in Florida that is why he did not get its electorial votes.

Every state Gore won in popular vote he recieved that states Electoral votes likewise with Bush.

Large States like California skewed the popular vote overall. Doesnt matter if a state is won by a million votes or by a hundred..that states winner will get all of its electorial votes. Arguing otherwise is utter nonsene.

 

[xxCivicxx]

Gore lost the popular vote in Florida that is why he did not get its electorial votes.

Ever state Gore won in popular vote he recieved that states Electoral votes likewise with Bush.

Large States like California skewed the popular vote overall. Doesnt matter if a state is won by a million votes or by a hundred..that states winner will get all of its electorial votes. Arguing otherwise is utter nonsene.

And AGAIN, this shows that the popular vote is irrelevant smh

 

[xxCivicxx]

I've yet to see any viable alternatives as to what exactly not voting will accomplish...and anyone who thinks a Trump presidency wouldn't do far more harm than Hilary is very misinformed. I've yet to see anyone say Hilary is perfect and her flaws are very well known but to pretend as if it will make no difference between her running the country vs Trump is where you expose your own ignorance

What sense does it make to keep going for the status quo?

In any other instance I'm all for challenging the status quo...but when the alternative is 4 years under Trump many find that risk not with taking

Again, your entire argument in favor of hillary has nothing to do with her or her policies

You've been programmed to think trump whenever someone mentions hillary's past

You are literally brainwashed

Because it's a binary choice dude. It has nothing to do with "brainwashing."

It's not a binary choice

The fact that you think it is is proof of your brainwashing

Either Clinton or Trump will win the presidency. Two choices. A one or a zero. That's the definition of a binary choice.

You don't decide who becomes president, the electoral college does

You show faith in the system by participating in voting

Your choice in whether to participate or not is not binary

And who decides how the electoral college votes? Also, participating or not is also a binary choice. Any yes or no or choice or 1 thing out of 2 possible choices is by DEFINITION binary.

The electoral college decides how the electoral college votes

You're confusing yourself

Nah the electoral college goes off of the popular vote of the state. There's never been an instance in American history where the popular vote of a state went with one candidate and the electoral college said nah we going a different way. ONE or TWO single voters in the electoral college might try to vote a different way on some "protest" shit but it has never swayed the election.

People always point to the Bush vs Gore election...but that was a case where the popular vote NATIONALLY went to Gore but the way the math worked out with the individual states and their votes, Bush got more electoral votes (even though that's only because Gore didn't press the issue with Florida and if he had he would have won)

Lol you literally just contradicted yourself in your post

The popular vote has nothing to do with the electoral vote

The electorate normally vote with the popular vote so as to avoid revolts and keep the masses docile, but they are not obligated to vote how the people vote

Bush lost the popular vote by 2 million and became president. No matter how you want to slice it, the fact remains that you saw the irrelevancy of the popular vote in your own lifetime

The popular vote is irrelevant on a NATIONAL level. On a state level the popular vote is THE determining factor of how the state's electoral college vote goes. The electoral college has historically ALWAYS voted with the popular vote of its state with the exception of one or two "faithless electors" which are rare and don't ever sway the election.

You're agreeing with me so I'm not sure these posts are about

And once again, saying "always" and then "with the exception" is a contradiction

And once again, the electoral college is not OBLIGATED to vote how the people vote

And once again, they do so only to keep the facade/ritual going

What you appear to be saying is that the popular vote is irrelevant and the electoral college decides the election. You're pointing to the 2000 election to support your argument.

What I'm telling you is that the popular vote on a STATE level is what determines who gets the electoral college votes for that state. And the whole "always" and "with exception" hang up is basically this:

If California has 55 electoral points and Candidate A wins the popular vote in California, then candidate A is entitled to 55 electoral points. When it's time for the ceremonial vote casting of the electors one of the 55 electors says "ahh fuck it I'm writing in my mom" then sure Candidate A will technically will only get 54 votes from California but it will be inconsequential. There's NEVER in the history of the country been an instance where a state's entire electoral college decided to flip against the popular vote of its state. To state that the electoral college is not obligated to vote how the people vote is to argue hypotheticals with no historical precedent.

And AGAIN, I REPEAT, Al Gore won the popular vote ON THE STATE BY STATE LEVEL

And AGAIN, I REPEAT, the electoral college did not vote the way of the popular vote

"Entitlement" and "obligation" are 2 completely different concepts. I'm not sure what you're arguing

I've already explained to you multiple times why the electoral college CHOOSES to vote with the people in most instances

The fact that the electoral college has not completely disregarded the popular vote yet is irrelevant. They have the power to, this is what you aren't understanding

Al Gore won the popular vote NATIONALLY. Absolutely. On a national level Al Gore received 540,000 more votes than George W. Bush.

What I'm saying is, the reason George W. Bush became president wasn't because the electoral college electors of any state saying "nah fuck it we want Bush". EVERY electoral college elector in that election went with the decision of the state's respective popular vote. The reason Bush got more electoral college votes was because of the way the math played out for how many votes each state was worth. So the hypothetical situation that you're pushing (a scenario where a candidate wins a state's popular vote but the electoral college bucks and goes with a different candidate) is not what happened in the 2000 election so it doesn't support your argument. America's presidential election is not a "nationwide" type of election. It goes state by state so it is mathematically possible (but rare, it's happened 4 times in the nation's history) that on a national level one candidate may get more votes than another candidate but still lose the presidency. But to say

The electoral college chooses the president, so your popular vote is literally you showing faith in the system and NOTHING ELSE

implies that the electoral college operates independently of the popular vote and that's just not true. In any given state if Candidate A gets more popular votes than Candidate B than the electoral college votes for that state are going to Candidate A..period. Sure they are NOT "obgligated" to vote the way the popular vote went..but the electors are APPOINTED by the candidates who won that state. The prospect of them all simultaneously bucking against the people that appointed them is minuscule and has no historical precedent.

Smh you keep making these long posts just to agree with what I said

 

[nujerz84]

Gore lost the popular vote in Florida that is why he did not get its electorial votes.

Ever state Gore won in popular vote he recieved that states Electoral votes likewise with Bush.

Large States like California skewed the popular vote overall. Doesnt matter if a state is won by a million votes or by a hundred..that states winner will get all of its electorial votes. Arguing otherwise is utter nonsene.

And AGAIN, this shows that the popular vote is irrelevant smh

You dont get the electoral votes without winning the popular vote in that state.