Trump is going to be a horrible president and it's certain because of the following facts:

[TyroneSlothrop]

...before Bush 2000 was Inaugurated while losing the popular vote that had only happened once in the history of our Nation...now it has happened twice in the span of 16 years .........

Be careful what you wish for: Keep the Electoral College: Our view
With Hillary Clinton more than 300,000 votes ahead of President-elect Donald Trump in the popular vote count as of Thursday, calls have already begun to ditch the Electoral College system enshrined in the Constitution for choosing presidents.

If Clinton’s lead holds, she would be the second contender in modern times — joining fellow Democrat Al Gore in 2000 — to win the popular vote but lose the White House by failing to amass the 270 electoral votes needed to capture it.

Filmmaker and progressive activist Michael Moore colorfully summed up Democratic feelings about Trump's victory: "The only reason he's president is because of an arcane, insane 18th century idea called the Electoral College."

But those clamoring to dump the system cobbled together by the nation’s Founders — which gives each state as many electoral votes as it has members of Congress — should be careful what they wish for. Adopting a national popular vote would trade one set of problems for another.

Electoral College opponents argue that the system pushes candidates to ignore states that Republicans or Democrats consider sure things and focus on a dozen battleground states during the campaigns. But Tuesday's election showed that the Electoral College map is more fluid than many people believed. Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, considered reliably Democratic, swung Republican.

If the national popular vote were the ultimate decider, candidates would gravitate toward the voter-rich big cities and their suburbs and ignore everyone else. If candidates felt obliged to blanket the entire country with visits and advertising, it would set off a scramble for even more campaign money, leaving candidates more beholden to special interests.

A popular vote contest involving multiple candidates could produce a winner with, say, only 35% of the vote, provoking an outcry to create a runoff process involving the top two vote-getters. And if the U.S. popular vote were so close that a nationwide recount were needed, the process could turn into a nightmare dwarfing the Florida fiasco of 2000.

For those seeking change, there are two avenues: Amend the Constitution, which is extraordinarily difficult, or do an end run around the Constitution, which a group called National Popular Vote has been trying. The group seeks to pass state laws mandating that the states' electoral votes be cast for whoever wins the U.S. popular vote. Ten states and Washington, D.C., representing 165 electoral votes, have signed on, and it has been most popular in states with Democrat-controlled legislatures. The compact would take effect when it's ratified by states representing at least 270 electoral votes.

This scheme sounds clever, but dig down and you find problems. Imagine for a moment what would happen when New Yorkers, reliably Democratic in presidential elections, learned that their legislature was casting all its electoral votes for a Republican candidate because he or she won the popular vote. Uproar is too modest a word.

The current system is far from ideal, and one idea worth considering is to shift away from winner-take-all in each state to a proportional allocation of electors based on statewide vote totals. But any change to a system that has generally served the nation well for more than two centuries should be both bipartisan and carefully considered.

Democrats are the wounded party now, but going into this election they thought they had a "blue firewall" of states that gave them a big Electoral College advantage. The way to win is to run better campaigns and better candidates under the existing rules, not try to change the rules after a painful loss.

(Adopt our plan for a popular vote: Opposing view)

Yeah, in the next presidential election if the dems win by electoral college votes, they will be sobbing and wanting to change it back. Lol. They are unable to deal with reality, I think that much is pretty obvious in ALL of their beliefs.

I made observations that are empirical in nature ...in other words they are reports on available data ...both of you made a straw man argument and are beating it up....

Here are the facts as I posted them

Before the elections in 2000 a President elected while losing the popular vote had only happened once before in all of our Nation's history...A Fact not an opinion

Assuming that the POP vote figures remain as its being reported this will be the second time in 16 years that the Will of the Majority of voters will not elect the POTUS....this is also a Fact not an opinion

The Fact that the system is not reflecting the will of the Majority is not a recipe for political stability.....This is an opinion.....

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

[

.....and this compares how to calling ISIS the JV Team?

who said " I know more about ISIS than US Generals"

 

[ChrisL]

...before Bush 2000 was Inaugurated while losing the popular vote that had only happened once in the history of our Nation...now it has happened twice in the span of 16 years .........

Be careful what you wish for: Keep the Electoral College: Our view
With Hillary Clinton more than 300,000 votes ahead of President-elect Donald Trump in the popular vote count as of Thursday, calls have already begun to ditch the Electoral College system enshrined in the Constitution for choosing presidents.

If Clinton’s lead holds, she would be the second contender in modern times — joining fellow Democrat Al Gore in 2000 — to win the popular vote but lose the White House by failing to amass the 270 electoral votes needed to capture it.

Filmmaker and progressive activist Michael Moore colorfully summed up Democratic feelings about Trump's victory: "The only reason he's president is because of an arcane, insane 18th century idea called the Electoral College."

But those clamoring to dump the system cobbled together by the nation’s Founders — which gives each state as many electoral votes as it has members of Congress — should be careful what they wish for. Adopting a national popular vote would trade one set of problems for another.

Electoral College opponents argue that the system pushes candidates to ignore states that Republicans or Democrats consider sure things and focus on a dozen battleground states during the campaigns. But Tuesday's election showed that the Electoral College map is more fluid than many people believed. Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, considered reliably Democratic, swung Republican.

If the national popular vote were the ultimate decider, candidates would gravitate toward the voter-rich big cities and their suburbs and ignore everyone else. If candidates felt obliged to blanket the entire country with visits and advertising, it would set off a scramble for even more campaign money, leaving candidates more beholden to special interests.

A popular vote contest involving multiple candidates could produce a winner with, say, only 35% of the vote, provoking an outcry to create a runoff process involving the top two vote-getters. And if the U.S. popular vote were so close that a nationwide recount were needed, the process could turn into a nightmare dwarfing the Florida fiasco of 2000.

For those seeking change, there are two avenues: Amend the Constitution, which is extraordinarily difficult, or do an end run around the Constitution, which a group called National Popular Vote has been trying. The group seeks to pass state laws mandating that the states' electoral votes be cast for whoever wins the U.S. popular vote. Ten states and Washington, D.C., representing 165 electoral votes, have signed on, and it has been most popular in states with Democrat-controlled legislatures. The compact would take effect when it's ratified by states representing at least 270 electoral votes.

This scheme sounds clever, but dig down and you find problems. Imagine for a moment what would happen when New Yorkers, reliably Democratic in presidential elections, learned that their legislature was casting all its electoral votes for a Republican candidate because he or she won the popular vote. Uproar is too modest a word.

The current system is far from ideal, and one idea worth considering is to shift away from winner-take-all in each state to a proportional allocation of electors based on statewide vote totals. But any change to a system that has generally served the nation well for more than two centuries should be both bipartisan and carefully considered.

Democrats are the wounded party now, but going into this election they thought they had a "blue firewall" of states that gave them a big Electoral College advantage. The way to win is to run better campaigns and better candidates under the existing rules, not try to change the rules after a painful loss.

(Adopt our plan for a popular vote: Opposing view)

Yeah, in the next presidential election if the dems win by electoral college votes, they will be sobbing and wanting to change it back. Lol. They are unable to deal with reality, I think that much is pretty obvious in ALL of their beliefs.

I made observations that are empirical in nature ...in other words they are reports on available data ...both of you made a straw man argument and are beating it up....

Here are the facts as I posted them

Before the elections in 2000 a President elected while losing the popular vote had only happened once before in all of our Nation's history...A Fact not an opinion

Assuming that the POP vote figures remain as its being reported this will be the second time in 16 years that the Will of the Majority of voters will not elect the POTUS....this is also a Fact not an opinion

The Fact that the system is not reflecting the will of the Majority is not a recipe for political stability.....This is an opinion.....

Accept your defeat gracefully. Donald Trump is your new president.

 

[Divine Wind]

The electoral college is putting a man in power who is going to lose the popular vote by possibly as much as 2 percent...The white rural voters have inflicted their politics on the majority...that is why there is going to be unrest..the majority of "We the People" is not being serve3d ...make no mistake about it ..the Majority REJECTED Trump... Do not lecture me about the system ... I am aware the system uses the Electoral college and that Trump will be Inaugurated ....that still does not refute that the majority of the US population rejected Trump...the system did not reject him it will inaugurate him...

Translation: City people should dictate to the rest of the nation what is best for them.

Thanks. Got it, but disagreed.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

4 million names have been gathered in the last 3 days on a petition that will be delivered with this letter to the electoral college members. At this rate there should be more than 40 million signatures by that time.

The leftist attempt at a political coup will fail. America voted and you were thrown out of power. Don't get me wrong, I want you to continue for anyone who doesn't see what the leftists really are.

Street demonstration are guaranteed by the US Constitution as legal and appropriate ...

 

[ChrisL]

Hillary campaign was arrogant and thought they had the election in the bag. THAT is one reason why she lost. Deal with it.

 

[Divine Wind]

Who said " I know more about ISIS than US Generals"

Not the guy who said "If you like your health care plan, you can keep it". Amirite?

 

[ChrisL]

4 million names have been gathered in the last 3 days on a petition that will be delivered with this letter to the electoral college members. At this rate there should be more than 40 million signatures by that time.

The leftist attempt at a political coup will fail. America voted and you were thrown out of power. Don't get me wrong, I want you to continue for anyone who doesn't see what the leftists really are.

Street demonstration are guaranteed by the US Constitution as legal and appropriate ...

UNLESS they are opposing your side, right? Then they are "terrorists, racists, bigots, etc."

 

[Divine Wind]

Street demonstration are guaranteed by the US Constitution as legal and appropriate ...

I fully support the First Amendment and, unlike you, all of the other Amendments.

OTOH, where in the Freedom of Assembly does it allow you to infringe on the rights of others by blocking free passage? Damaging public or private property? Verbally or physically assaulting others?

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Accept your defeat gracefully. Donald Trump is your new president.

Sure I accept and by the way much more gracefully than you all accepted the Negro POTUS LOL AFTER ALL I am reality based


now you prove you are reality base and accept that he is not a reflection of the majority of the US population which happens to be an empirical fact...at least at this time

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Street demonstration are guaranteed by the US Constitution as legal and appropriate ...

I fully support the First Amendment and, unlike you, all of the other Amendments.

OTOH, where in the Freedom of Assembly does it allow you to infringe on the rights of others by blocking free passage? Damaging public or private property? Verbally or physically assaulting others?

Do you support the voter suppression effort of the GOP

Yes_____

NO_____

 

[ChrisL]

Accept your defeat gracefully. Donald Trump is your new president.

Sure I accept and by the way much more gracefully than you all accepted the Negro POTUS LOL AFTER ALL I am reality based


now you prove you are reality base and accept that he is not a reflection of the majority of the US population which happens to be an empirical fact...at least at this time

I accepted Obama's presidential win. I didn't take the streets in protest. I wanted to see what he could do for Americans like me. He didn't really do much though. The most "transparent" presidency? Remember THAT promise. Lol.

 

[ChrisL]

Street demonstration are guaranteed by the US Constitution as legal and appropriate ...

I fully support the First Amendment and, unlike you, all of the other Amendments.

OTOH, where in the Freedom of Assembly does it allow you to infringe on the rights of others by blocking free passage? Damaging public or private property? Verbally or physically assaulting others?

Do you support the voter suppression effort of the GOP

Yes_____

NO_____

There is NO voter suppression effort. Lol.

 

[ChrisL]

Instead of focusing on telling us what SHE was going to do for us and the country, Hillary campaign focused on her opponent. Another mistake.

 

[007]

LOL ---- did you copy this off the bathroom wall at the local elementary school???

No. I'm the one that wrote it there.

Then you're a petulant little sophomoric butt hurt progtard.

Get a life.

 

[ChrisL]

Hillary's campaign even stooped to calling the American people, taxpayers, who pay her salary, names. Think about that! Really think about it for a minute. Disgusting and despicable.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

This is the GOP gracefully accepting the election of Obama

"where is your Birth certificate you Foreign Kenyan"


This is Donald Trump gracefully accepting the Re-Election of Obama
2012, Trump tried to incite supporters of defeated Republican nominee Mitt Romney to take to the streets in protest of President Barack Obama’s re-election.

Donald J. Trump Verified account ‏@realDonaldTrump


We can't let this happen. We should march on Washington and stop this travesty. Our nation is totally divided!

8:29 PM - 6 Nov 2012

 

[bodecea]

1) He has the emotional maturity of a 14 year old girl.

2) His impending court cases.

3) He knows nothing about public policy or business. There's plenty of evidence for that.

4) His vocabulary and speech sophistication is no better than a 6th grader's.

5) He has an unhealthy relationship with Putin.

6) He wins World's Ugliest National Leader

I hope for the sake of us all, you are as wrong at that as we were with the election.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Hillary's campaign even stooped to calling the American people, taxpayers, who pay her salary, names. Think about that! Really think about it for a minute. Disgusting and despicable.

its almost as bad as the slander Trump let loose on women and minorities ....

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Hillary's campaign even stooped to calling the American people, taxpayers, who pay her salary, names. Think about that! Really think about it for a minute. Disgusting and despicable.

Look here is graceful Donald ...you like ?

2012, Trump tried to incite supporters of defeated Republican nominee Mitt Romney to take to the streets in protest of President Barack Obama’s re-election.