pucho812
Well-known member
By definition the U.S.A. is not a pure democracy... That's grad school government class. Surely we all know the difference.
Donald trump. what is your take on him?
- Thread starter pucho812
- Start date
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
M
mattiasNYC
Guest
pucho812 said:
I hope I'm not the only one who noticed how Pucho smoothly shifted the conversation:
FROM: Trump-supporters whined about a rigged election before election, now wants to stop a recount which would validate their win.
TO: The semantics of "democracy" and "republic".
Par for the course.
pucho812
Well-known member
I didn't shift the conversation so much as mention a correction in thinking that our country is democracy. By definition it is not.
We can gladly go back to talking about the recount costing millions of dollars in which the first day recounting in Wisconsin found a tremendous error causing clinton to gain a whopping total of 1 more vote. then previously reported.
We can gladly go back to talking about the recount costing millions of dollars in which the first day recounting in Wisconsin found a tremendous error causing clinton to gain a whopping total of 1 more vote. then previously reported.
M
mattiasNYC
Guest
pucho812 said:
Trust me, I got over that notion years ago. But yeah, you really did change the topic, quite successfully.
pucho812 said:
I see. So basically the Trump supporters that oppose the recount are doing it for fiscal reasons, is that correct?
bruno2000
Well-known member
pucho812 said:
8th grade civics for me......
Best,
Bruno2000
So it's not just us crazy lefties who think the media gave Trump a free ride:
In extraordinary exchanges, aides to Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush openly accused Mr. Zucker of enabling Mr. Trump and undermining their candidates in the Republican primary, heckling from their seats as Mr. Zucker spoke on a panel in a hotel ballroom.
(The Mr. Zucker in this quote from an NYT article is president of CNN.)
I don't expect JR to be at all convinced that he's wrong, but it's always fun to needle Mr. Roberts (and discredit his baseless opinions) whenever possible.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/01/business/media/trump-cnns-coverage-biased-presidential-candidates-aides-say.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=b-lede-package-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=1
In extraordinary exchanges, aides to Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush openly accused Mr. Zucker of enabling Mr. Trump and undermining their candidates in the Republican primary, heckling from their seats as Mr. Zucker spoke on a panel in a hotel ballroom.
(The Mr. Zucker in this quote from an NYT article is president of CNN.)
I don't expect JR to be at all convinced that he's wrong, but it's always fun to needle Mr. Roberts (and discredit his baseless opinions) whenever possible.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/01/business/media/trump-cnns-coverage-biased-presidential-candidates-aides-say.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=b-lede-package-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=1
dmp
Well-known member
The recount here in Wisconsin is actually getting very interesting. Yes, the initial results show no change because - as far as I can tell - they didn't actually recount the votes, they just ran them through the same damn machines again. Of course they got the same count.
The machines use a proprietary code that the public does not know - we're just supposed to trust that the corporations are being competent and honest.
So the only way to know if the machines were accurate is to actually recount the actual ballets by hand. For some reason a lot of people are terrified of doing that. Strange? And what triggered the recount was the disparities in exit polling, which for this election were multiple percentage points in Clinton's favor. Why were the exit polls systematically over estimating Clinton voters by 5% in multiple swing states?
This comes after the Republicans got swatted by a Federal Court for egregious gerrymandering in redistricting in 2010. The worst in politics seems to be here with Scott Walker, like flies on sh*t.
The machines use a proprietary code that the public does not know - we're just supposed to trust that the corporations are being competent and honest.
So the only way to know if the machines were accurate is to actually recount the actual ballets by hand. For some reason a lot of people are terrified of doing that. Strange? And what triggered the recount was the disparities in exit polling, which for this election were multiple percentage points in Clinton's favor. Why were the exit polls systematically over estimating Clinton voters by 5% in multiple swing states?
This comes after the Republicans got swatted by a Federal Court for egregious gerrymandering in redistricting in 2010. The worst in politics seems to be here with Scott Walker, like flies on sh*t.
I think the reason the exit polls or the pre- election polls don't agree with the final result is three-fold.
1. Some people don't want to admit they voted for Trump.
2. Some people are ornery and like to mess with the polls.
3. Some people think its none of their damned business.
There is probably only a few percent of people who are like that. but enough to cause errors in the polls.
DaveP
1. Some people don't want to admit they voted for Trump.
2. Some people are ornery and like to mess with the polls.
3. Some people think its none of their damned business.
There is probably only a few percent of people who are like that. but enough to cause errors in the polls.
DaveP
M
mattiasNYC
Guest
dmp said:
I can't fully understand how that would cost $3.5m......
M
mattiasNYC
Guest
DaveP said:
Could go both ways though. So, statistically speaking I'm not sure why it'd make a difference.
A little surprised at how much venom that has released. I will apologize now if I was a fraction that mean to President Obama supporters. It is a secret ballot for that reason.DaveP said:
Media has seemed to shift from reporting to outright advocacy. Few thoughtful people appreciate that.
it isn't.... While indeed it is about "business".
Remarkably these same people in media who were so wrong predicting the outcome, are now predicting a ruinous future.
FWIW I also called the election outcome wrong. I'm glad I was wrong but I still get heat on social media for sharing. For now I'm thinking about other stuff more important than this.
Just like uninformed americans learn geography from wars (at least some do), it seems they also learn civics from contested elections ( some still don't and never will understand, or choose to press some false narrative for political points).
It seems both parties are now a little more focussed on vote integrity. I am confident that my local elections (in small town MS) were good, but I do not live in a contested state where the attention needs to be placed. We have years to review and make improvements as needed, but inspect and recount away, share your work results so we can make the next one better.
JR
PS: Several states have reported pressure and one elector (MI) reports receiving a death threat to pressure him to change his vote in the electoral college. Reportedly a national anti-trump organization (notmypresident) released elector's personal information (phone numbers, addresses, religion, race, gender, etc). Enabling this bad behavior, which may be argued as free speech lobbying, except for the death threat, which is criminal if real. Not sure why someone would make that up, but the political climate is not very calm, worst I can recall.
pucho812
Well-known member
mattiasNYC said:
I can't speak for trump supporters... But so far the recount has yielded nothing. As for recent development in Wisconsin looks like a judge rulled that you can't stop the recount and that they have to go do it at minimum until December 9th when a court hearing will take place...
Is there something we are missing?
The man (woman?) behind the curtain?pucho812 said:
JR
M
mattiasNYC
Guest
JohnRoberts said:
Well John, sometimes a spade is just a spade. When Trump says global warming is a hoax the Chinese came up with and then lies everyone in the face - including you John - in a debate, there's really only one way to describe that in media. Same with the Iraq-war opposition claim. Same with his insanely hypocritical usage of women accusing Bill Clinton of sex crimes considering his own accusers.
He's a candidate that openly lied multiple times, spoke untruths during his rallies, advocated violence during his rallies, vilified Muslims and Mexicans, objectified women etc. The same can't be said for Hillary regardless of whether or not you think she was less suitable as a president.
The media called a spade a spade, and only a spade-supporter would have a problem with that. Sometimes things just aren't "equal" and shouldn't be treated as such.
JohnRoberts said:
The same could have been said after the 2000 election, yet here we are. Btw, I'm actually not suspecting foul play, but it's as I said funny to see how the Trump-camp who cried about the election being rigged now try to stop a recount. Hypocrisy is one of the clearly key defining words of the Trump campaign. I'm willing to bet his presidency will fit that description as well.
JohnRoberts said:
And we have your candidate's campaign and his supporters to thank for that....
Phrazemaster
Well-known member
What I've always appreciated about this forum is the common courtesy and respect members give each other.hodad said:
Whether you like JR or not his opinions are always well-thought out and anything but baseless. No wonder he tries to avoid this thread.
People can we agree to disagree without attaching each other?
M
mattiasNYC
Guest
Phrazemaster said:
I don't disagree with you, but I again feel the urge to point out the "humor" in holding us to a higher standard than the president-elect of the most powerful country on earth. And 'yes', I do find it somewhat ironic that John supported a candidate that spewed and/or at least fomented vitriol, hatred and xenophobia, yet there's now an apparent need for conversations to be moderated to be 'nicer'.
I'm tempted to say "You got what you wished for. Part of the package", except we're still far nicer than Trump was during his campaign.
micaddict
Well-known member
Attaching might not be such a bad idea actually.
Phrazemaster said:
I didn't call John a name (other than his own), though I was perhaps less kind towards some of the opinions he holds. Various bits of right wing propaganda have been debunked during the course of this thread(by Mattias and others), which I think is vital if generally not very effective. It may not repair the minds already warped by the lies and distortions, but perhaps it will keep others from falling into the same trap. John said that the media bias against Trump had been "well documented," so I thought it worth noting that some very conservative politicians did not agree with this assessment. And as Mattias pointed out it's rather ironic that we're supposed to be more civil in discussing a politician who is anything but.
M
mattiasNYC
Guest
micaddict said:Attaching might not be such a bad idea actually.
heh...
Phrazemaster
Well-known member
Touché ;DmattiasNYC said:heh...
