Actually I think the POTUS salary is a bit more than that sooooooooo..........
It's actually is quite a big less, and Trump was elected. He earned his position. He didn't get it because his dad was the president.
Actually it's quite a bit
more --- $400k to be precise.
You are correct that Rump didn't get it because his dad was POTUS -- that would be Shrub. Rather, Rump got
rich because his dad was. Like everything else, handed to him for nothing. All he had to do was play the part of sponge.
You need to look up what the word "earn" means.
Trump was elected because the american people chose him and rejected crooked hillary. the clintons are also very rich, but unlike Trump, they got theirs at our expense.
I hope you are not claiming that the clintons "earned" their millions, you aren't that dumb are you?
I haven't posted about the "clintons '[sic]" at all. Changing the subject because the current one is too hot to handle is your thing, not mine. And one hopes you are not claiming that Rump "earned"
his millions, by the courageous act of standing still while Daddy handed it to him saying "here son, I won't be around to use this money I scammed from the FHA so you take it and continue my sleazy work".
As to your first claim, the american [sic] people didn't "choose" him at all. "Rejected" ""hillary [sic]" got more votes than he did. Moreover, in those constantly-cited crucial states of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin --- as well as several others including my own, even including Utah ---- NOBODY won a majority of the state's vote.
How's that for being "chosen by the american [sic] people? A candy with an R after his name
can't even win Utah.
MORE moreover, as per usual because of our perverted election-charade system, only 55% of eligible voters even bothered to make the trip, because what's the point, and 46% of those chose Rump. You can do the math but I already did --- 46% of 55% means 25% of the "american [sic}" people made that choice. Feel free to essplain to the class how one-quarter of a population equates to "the american [sic] people".
both candidates knew the rules and how the EC works before the election. One of them used those rules to his benefit and the other didn't. We don't change our constitution because a candidate runs a stupid campaign.
And, without the EC Trump would have campaigned in California, NY, south Florida, and other left wing areas, neither of us can say what the result would have been under those circumstances
and I am quite knowledgeable on the capitalization rules of grammar, I just sometimes forget to hit the shift key------------------please forgive me, teacher.
Yes, indeed both (indeed ALL, since there were and always are more than two) candidates knew and still know the rules and how the EC works. That's not the point. The point is that YOU don't. Clearly you don't, since here's what you posted:
Trump was elected because the american [sic] people chose him and rejected crooked hillary [sic].
To which I gave you the numbers, which reveal this is not only erroneous but not even
remotely close.
Not to be outdone, you immediately afterward posted this:
the [sic] clintons [sic] are also very rich, but unlike Trump, they got theirs at our expense.
-- which ignores the fact that Rump got his from his father -- you know, the Swedish guy from the very wonderful place in Germany --- who DID get it at our expense. Not to mention one can't help noticing that "Trump" is the only word in the entire sentence that gets an uppercase, which means your shift key
does work.
Finally, once again snapping back to the red herring factory, nobody suggested we "change our Constitution". Nobody brought up the Constitution at all.
But you do have a point that without the WTA/EC, Rump would have campaigned in NY, California etc, Clinton would have campaigned in Texas, Alabama, etc, and they didn't, specifically because they DO understand how the system works, which means they know those locked "red" and locked "blue" states are the waste product of it, which in turn makes the election into a sham charade, because nobody in any of those states, including your own, has a vote that means jack shit. You for example can vote red, you can vote blue, you can vote 3P, or you can stay home and learn to speak Japanese, and all four produce exactly the same EC result with the exception that exercising option four you've actually learned some Japanese. You have no vote, thanks to the WTA/EC.
None of that changes the actual numbers as counted of course, but if your state and all those other so-called "red" and "blue" states were NOT tossing votes into the shredder, then maybe we'd get more of a national turnout than the embarrassing 55% which is a world laughingstock, because those votes would actually COUNT. What would the totals be then? No one knows, as you point out. But we do know what the totals
were and you don't get to massage them into "the american [sic] people chose him". Not even the
Utah people chose him. This I'll-just-invent-my-own-reality bullshit has GOT to go. That is literally madness.
