President Trump

[HM-PuFFNSTuFF]

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... Gt6S31r.01

[seremtan]

I'm not saying that. But you cannot deny a trend of oversimplification when it comes to elections. The US isn't unique in this, but certainly in a trendsetting position.

If this weren't true, someone like Trump would never become as popular as he is. It's not his well thought out plans and policies for the next 4 years that's winning him votes. It's his oversimplification of a number of hot topics and delivering these non-solutions wrapped in a form factor that appeals to a broad selection of the voting populace.

"but... but... we had a considered, well thought out and detailed policy platform, and we still didn't get elected! what gives? it must have been the media, focusing on personalities not issues, and refusing to talk about the things that really matter. yeah, that must be it. either than or people are just dumb. yeah, fuck those idiots."

said every electoral loser ever

[seremtan]

Oh, by the way, you're keen on attacking me personally on how I have no idea what stuff is about. You're making cheap shots at my persona to try and invalidate things I write, no matter how contextually relevant they are. You must appreciate the irony in that, considering the subject matter.

i do appreciate that this is a messageboard on which a culture of personal insults and flames has become the norm over a period of 17 years, even in what is supposed to be a flame-free general discussion sub-forum

[Eraser]

I'm not saying that. But you cannot deny a trend of oversimplification when it comes to elections. The US isn't unique in this, but certainly in a trendsetting position.

If this weren't true, someone like Trump would never become as popular as he is. It's not his well thought out plans and policies for the next 4 years that's winning him votes. It's his oversimplification of a number of hot topics and delivering these non-solutions wrapped in a form factor that appeals to a broad selection of the voting populace.

"but... but... we had a considered, well thought out and detailed policy platform, and we still didn't get elected! what gives? it must have been the media, focusing on personalities not issues, and refusing to talk about the things that really matter. yeah, that must be it. either than or people are just dumb. yeah, fuck those idiots."

said every electoral loser ever

So you're not disagreeing with me.
Are you OK with how things are regarding politics? Don't you feel that the whole circus these pre-elections so far have been pretty much confirm the bankruptcy of the American democratic system? Isnt a choice between Hillary and Donald as bad as it can realisticly get? And isnt it true that this can largely be attributed to ignorance and laziness on the american voters' end?

[Eraser]

i do appreciate that this is a messageboard on which a culture of personal insults and flames has become the norm over a period of 17 years, even in what is supposed to be a flame-free general discussion sub-forum

Pretty much like American politics then

[losCHUNK]

Before I wade in too much, wtf are super delegates ?. That's those things Billary has been grabbing innit ?, what's burying Bernie

If the answer is what I think it is, then you don't really need to ask the question about how happy anyone is with the current state of politics and corruption

[seremtan]

Are you OK with how things are regarding politics? Don't you feel that the whole circus these pre-elections so far have been pretty much confirm the bankruptcy of the American democratic system? Isnt a choice between Hillary and Donald as bad as it can realisticly get? And isnt it true that this can largely be attributed to ignorance and laziness on the american voters' end?

try to remember that these are just primaries, and that both Drumpf and Shillary have rock-bottom approval ratings among the general population. in fact i saw an infographic somewhere (can't remember where, sorry) that showed that their approval ratings were the worst in decades (among nominees, that is)

also, if you start from the view that Drumpf supporters are irredeemable morons, you not only miss the underlying causes for their support for such a total mong (such as the semi-detachment of much of the political establishment from the voters, for example), but also start down the road that ends with the belief that democracy is a stupid idea and that leaders should be chosen by the great and the good (whoever they may be)

[Transient]

Before I wade in too much, wtf are super delegates ?. That's those things Billary has been grabbing innit ?, what's burying Bernie

Delegates are elected by the people. Superdelegates are awarded their position automatically based on their position in government and the DNC picks other superdelegates during the primary season. All sitting governors and senators are superdelegates, as are all past presidents, for example. People like Harvard law professors and deans of ivy league schools also make the cut. The other difference between delegates and superdelegates is that delegates proportionally represent their state's voters and must cast their votes accordingly, whereas superdelegates can vote for whichever candidate they want.

For example, even though nearly 90% of Vermont voted for Sanders in the primary and he got all 16 regular delegates, Gov. Shumlin, Sen. Leahy, Howard Dean and some committee person are all superdelegates and say they will vote for Clinton, with a 5th congressman holding off for now. That's 5 of the 10 superdelegates in the state, with Bernie being one of them. A big percentage of Vermont's representation is being stripped away, and people in my state are pissed. There are about 4,000 delegates and 700 superdelegates, so in a race that's even remotely close, you can see how they could fuck shit up.

One caveat, however, is that superdelegates haven't voted yet. The delegates vote in the primaries and the superdelegates vote at the convention (I believe).

[QuakeSteve]

[Transient]

I believe that comment was about the protest in Chicago that forced him to cancel his campaign stop, not about the idiot who rushed his podium on the following day. The message Trump puts out there and the persona he presents to his supporters creates an atmosphere of aggression. As a political figure, he has a responsibility to make sure people at his events don't get out of hand. He has a microphone; he can use it to rile people up or calm them down, it's his choice.

He tacitly condones violence. He's said things like "it adds a little flavor, makes things exciting," when referring to the dozens of people getting arrested for protesting at his rallies, and on several occasions made note of how fun the chaos is at his events. His campaign manager assaults people and Trump still supports him. After a protester was assaulted at one of his rallies, he said "maybe he should have been roughed up." He's gone further than that, though, and said "if you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of 'em," and then promised to pay the legal fees. He actually made the legal fee comment on a number of occasions, not just at one rally. When two of his supporters beat a homeless black man with a bat (which has been deemed a hate crime by the police), he wouldn't condemn the act and instead said that the men "love this country." The message to his supporters and detractors is loud and clear. His is a campaign of violence.

So it's not on Trump that someone rushed his podium, not directly. But he shaped his campaign and supporters, and crafted his persona in such as way as to make violence and drastic action acceptable and encouraged. He does nothing to quell the anger in the air, and instead fans the flames, instigating further disruption. That's why chaos is not a surprise when he speaks.

[losCHUNK]

Before I wade in too much, wtf are super delegates ?. That's those things Billary has been grabbing innit ?, what's burying Bernie

Delegates are elected by the people. Superdelegates are awarded their position automatically based on their position in government and the DNC picks other superdelegates during the primary season. All sitting governors and senators are superdelegates, as are all past presidents, for example. People like Harvard law professors and deans of ivy league schools also make the cut. The other difference between delegates and superdelegates is that delegates proportionally represent their state's voters and must cast their votes accordingly, whereas superdelegates can vote for whichever candidate they want.

For example, even though nearly 90% of Vermont voted for Sanders in the primary and he got all 16 regular delegates, Gov. Shumlin, Sen. Leahy, Howard Dean and some committee person are all superdelegates and say they will vote for Clinton, with a 5th congressman holding off for now. That's 5 of the 10 superdelegates in the state, with Bernie being one of them. A big percentage of Vermont's representation is being stripped away, and people in my state are pissed. There are about 4,000 delegates and 700 superdelegates, so in a race that's even remotely close, you can see how they could fuck shit up.

One caveat, however, is that superdelegates haven't voted yet. The delegates vote in the primaries and the superdelegates vote at the convention (I believe).

Thank you kind sire

So some are voted in by their party whilst others get the position for being a high judge / congressman or somesuch ?, then added to the delegates for each... state ?, I assume.

Sounds shit as fuck, means the party still holds sway for its own agenda rather than the public. Kinda like a fail safe plan lol. If Labour had something similiar implemented when they voted Corbyn in he would never have made it. (I think they did under the old process ?).

[Transient]

Your failsafe comment isn't far off the mark, but the Democratic National Committe would have you believe it's for another reason. The notion is that in the event that the leading candidate gets to the convention and then some PR disaster befalls them, the superdelegates could vote for the candidate in 2nd place so that in the general election, whatever calamity ruined the 1st place candidate doesn't tank the whole democratic party's chances at getting into the White House.

Say, for example, the leading candidate was under investigation by the FBI and may face indictment in the future. If the indictment is looming, and the 2nd place candidate has high support from voters, the superdelegates could push the person in 2nd place into a win at the convention and avoid the problem. Instead, what has the DNC said they would do? If Hillary gets indicted, they have said they would back Joe fucking Biden, a person who isn't even running, over Sanders. The DNC hates Sanders with a passion. But hey, the Democratic party is a private party, and they can elect whoever the fuck they want. Such is the system we have in place.

[seremtan]

so the DNC would rather piss in the voters' faces and run the risk of losing to Trump with Biden rather than endorse Sanders

meanwhile some republicans are getting ready to vote Clinton to avoid Trump

you couldn't make this shit up

[Tsakali]

Maybe this is the kick in the teeth the system needs for reform. Question is, wtf do u reform to?

It's easy to see how something fails, not so easy to see a holistic solution.

[losCHUNK]

Your failsafe comment isn't far off the mark, but the Democratic National Committe would have you believe it's for another reason. The notion is that in the event that the leading candidate gets to the convention and then some PR disaster befalls them, the superdelegates could vote for the candidate in 2nd place so that in the general election, whatever calamity ruined the 1st place candidate doesn't tank the whole democratic party's chances at getting into the White House.

Say, for example, the leading candidate was under investigation by the FBI and may face indictment in the future. If the indictment is looming, and the 2nd place candidate has high support from voters, the superdelegates could push the person in 2nd place into a win at the convention and avoid the problem. Instead, what has the DNC said they would do? If Hillary gets indicted, they have said they would back Joe fucking Biden, a person who isn't even running, over Sanders. The DNC hates Sanders with a passion. But hey, the Democratic party is a private party, and they can elect whoever the fuck they want. Such is the system we have in place.

*shakes head*

If it were me, that party would have lost any credibility it had left. If Labour oust Corbyn cos they don't like him, I'll never look at them again.

I get that a lot has to happen to Billary for the cards to fall into Bernies hands, but if they got given a choice of 2 people then chose the 3rd then that's gonna seriously fuck up the blue party in the long run, innit ?. Especially during election time ?

[losCHUNK]

Maybe this is the kick in the teeth the system needs for reform. Question is, wtf do u reform to?

It's easy to see how something fails, not so easy to see a holistic solution.

Get rid of the 2 party system ?, limit the money involved ?, rework the donation process ?, reduce election time from 18 months ? (seriously set up online voting it'll be sorted in a few days).

[seremtan]

lol, online voting in a country with dodgy voting machines and hanging chads

kiss democracy goodbye

[losCHUNK]

lol, online voting in a country with dodgy voting machines and hanging chads

kiss democracy goodbye

Yaknowwhadimean bitch tits.

Over a year to decide the leader of a party ?

[losCHUNK]

Your failsafe comment isn't far off the mark, but the Democratic National Committe would have you believe it's for another reason. The notion is that in the event that the leading candidate gets to the convention and then some PR disaster befalls them, the superdelegates could vote for the candidate in 2nd place so that in the general election, whatever calamity ruined the 1st place candidate doesn't tank the whole democratic party's chances at getting into the White House.

Say, for example, the leading candidate was under investigation by the FBI and may face indictment in the future. If the indictment is looming, and the 2nd place candidate has high support from voters, the superdelegates could push the person in 2nd place into a win at the convention and avoid the problem. Instead, what has the DNC said they would do? If Hillary gets indicted, they have said they would back Joe fucking Biden, a person who isn't even running, over Sanders. The DNC hates Sanders with a passion. But hey, the Democratic party is a private party, and they can elect whoever the fuck they want. Such is the system we have in place.

I was thinking about this and it is an utterly shite excuse to be fair. IF before the DNC handjob party the leading candidate got found with his cock in a horse than they can always invoke a rule, which I'm sure they already have, to oust him with a no confidence vote. Oh but we need super delegates to water down the regular vote... why !?

I think I'm more angry with the shit excuse...

[Transient]

If it were me, that party would have lost any credibility it had left. If Labour oust Corbyn cos they don't like him, I'll never look at them again.

I get that a lot has to happen to Billary for the cards to fall into Bernies hands, but if they got given a choice of 2 people then chose the 3rd then that's gonna seriously fuck up the blue party in the long run, innit ?. Especially during election time ?

Oh I haven't trusted the Democratic party in years. And if they pull that shit, nobody else will, either.

[Transient]

I was thinking about this and it is an utterly shite excuse to be fair. IF before the DNC handjob party the leading candidate got found with his cock in a horse than they can always invoke a rule, which I'm sure they already have, to oust him with a no confidence vote. Oh but we need super delegates to water down the regular vote... why !?

I think I'm more angry with the shit excuse...

More and more people in America are asking why we have superdelegates every election. What frustrates matters is that the media doesn't do much to explain superdelegates' role in elections, so many people don't understand how it works. What makes it worse, is when CNN and some other networks show Democratic delegate totals, they lump all the superdelegates in with the regular delegates without indicating it's combined. So people think Clinton is winning by way more than she actually is right now.

[losCHUNK]

Sooner or later somethings gonna give, same with our system tbf.

I still maintain that people just don't care enough, if the voters took enough of an interest they'd know about the super delegates, TTIP n all that shite. Even that shit with the NSA and Snowden was just seen as an embarrassing moment , and like always it'll all be forgotten about. I hate the news but I can't blame them for social apathy.

It's like, I know lower middle / working class people voting for Tory, just because of soundbites they hear... *Immigration / EU / Economy*, when in reality they are voting into power the very people that are sticking a pole up your arse and it doesn't take much to find that out, they obviously don't care enough

[losCHUNK]

Just look ffs, Trump... Fucking TRUMP. This is seriously like those reality shows, where the audience keeps voting to keep Trump in because he's the most entertaining and likely to implode !

*slams head against desk*

[Transient]

LOL, the left is authoritarian?

[seremtan]

lol @ calling Sanders "authoritarian"

put down the Wall Street Journal op-ed pages and step away. you have 10 seconds to comply