• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Trump is going to withdraw USA from Paris climate agreement (1 Viewer)

I actually don't think side discussions on BUT POPULAR VOTE are all that useful, as it doesn't seem likely the system will be changed anytime soon. Trump won, and it doesn't matter how many votes Hillary got; Electoral votes matter, not raw vote numbers.

However, in a hypothetical reality where popular vote mattered, Trump would have probably have used a different strategy, but if his twitter feed since his election shows anything, he is pretty much incapable of toning down his rhetoric. That edge in popular vote that Hillary got comes heavily from urban leftwing strongholds. I don't see any viable way he could have appealed to those voters.

As for third party candidates never winning because of statements like mine? Mine are grounded in reality. Provide one example in the history of this nation of a third party actually winning the presidency. A quick check on Wikipedia shows that the most electoral votes, taking in account the number available, that a third party won during a presidential election was about 23%, that was in 1860. If your prefer a measure by popular vote, then it's ~27%, and that was in 1912. We have had parties just collapse, but that just results in another party, usually heavily comprised of the politicians from the defunct party, becoming the new second party. Incidentally the last time THAT happened was in the 1850's, when the Whigs disintegrated over differences in opinion over the slavery question.

At local levels sure, third parties can do okay, I won't deny that. Although even then the number of senators and governors who are third party at any given time is vanishingly small.

If you want to change the government, the best approach isn't third party, but simply mobilize folks at the grassroots level to shift your party of choice in the direction you want. That's basically what the Tea Party did with the Republicans, and you can argue this is happening now to a lesser extent in the Democratic Party with Bernie loyal progressives.
 
I actually don't think side discussions on BUT POPULAR VOTE are all that useful, as it doesn't seem likely the system will be changed anytime soon. Trump won, and it doesn't matter how many votes Hillary got; Electoral votes matter, not raw vote numbers.

However, in a hypothetical reality where popular vote mattered, Trump would have probably have used a different strategy, but if his twitter feed since his election shows anything, he is pretty much incapable of toning down his rhetoric. That edge in popular vote that Hillary got comes heavily from urban leftwing strongholds. I don't see any viable way he could have appealed to those voters.

As for third party candidates never winning because of statements like mine? Mine are grounded in reality. Provide one example in the history of this nation of a third party actually winning the presidency. A quick check on Wikipedia shows that the most electoral votes, taking in account the number available, that a third party won during a presidential election was about 23%, that was in 1860. If your prefer a measure by popular vote, then it's ~27%, and that was in 1912. We have had parties just collapse, but that just results in another party, usually heavily comprised of the politicians from the defunct party, becoming the new second party. Incidentally the last time THAT happened was in the 1850's, when the Whigs disintegrated over differences in opinion over the slavery question.

At local levels sure, third parties can do okay, I won't deny that. Although even then the number of senators and governors who are third party at any given time is vanishingly small.

If you want to change the government, the best approach isn't third party, but simply mobilize folks at the grassroots level to shift your party of choice in the direction you want. That's basically what the Tea Party did with the Republicans, and you can argue this is happening now to a lesser extent in the Democratic Party with Bernie loyal progressives.

Agree with your views on third parties and on the need for work at the grassroots.

With regard to the popular vote, however, I only partially agree, since in my opinion it continues to be worth bringing up, both as a counter to claims by the right that Trump has a "mandate" for whatever he "pledged" (haha!) to do during in the campaign, and as propaganda for much needed root-and-branch constitutional reform (haha! again but wryly this time since the prospects for that seem very remote indeed at the current juncture).
 
Last edited:
Um.....proof please.

More media-driven propaganda BS. B :)
And if having a valid ID is voter intimidation, then yes, we are (proudly) guilty.

Per Curiam
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
NORTH CAROLINA, ET AL. v. SANDRA LITTLE COVINGTON, ET AL.
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
No. 16–1023. Decided June 5, 2017

Easy to find, and the latest in a series going back some time.
MJB
 
Per Curiam
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
NORTH CAROLINA, ET AL. v. SANDRA LITTLE COVINGTON, ET AL.
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
No. 16–1023. Decided June 5, 2017

Easy to find, and the latest in a series going back some time.
MJB

On Appeal....'latest in a series'. Fail.
Get back to me with something meaningful. Google is your friend. For all of the brain washing of the media, results will be hard to find.
Why? The left is the party of violence here in the U.S., but our media will protect them because they *are* the left.

I can start with the Black Panthers and their Philadelphia voter intimation in 2008. Wielding billy clubs right at the precinct door.
The left wing media will try to say this wasn't voter intimidation, but any intellectually honest viewer can see otherwise.
If a Republican had done this he'd be the poster child of intimidation.

Of course, laughing stock AG Eric Holder did nothing about it. Surprise!

Busy day at the ranch, and going to try to move on here.
Little respect anyway.
 
Donald Trump is the author of the book "The art of the deal", but pulled out from Pars deal. I can see some inconsistency.

His name is on the cover but the actual author is the ghostwriter, Tony Schwartz, who subsequently came to deeply regret he had had anything to do with it.

The following from a long article in the New Yorker (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all)--

“I put lipstick on a pig . . . (and) feel a deep sense of remorse that I contributed to presenting Trump in a way that brought him wider attention and made him more appealing than he is. . .. I genuinely believe that if Trump wins and gets the nuclear codes there is an excellent possibility it will lead to the end of civilization. If (I) were writing 'The Art of the Deal' today. . .it would be a very different book with a very different title: 'The Sociopath'”.
 
....This election was waged on creating American jobs and keeping foreigners out (note invasive species research not hit too much) - ironic that it took a foreign power to get him through the door....

So...I won't hold my breath waiting for this stupidity to be retracted.
Pure idiocy.
As many of us asserted all along, this "Russia" stuff was an immense crap-burger constructed by Podesta, Brock, et al to dodge the embarrassment of HRC's blistering loss to the 'unproductive spurt'.....

The only collusion with Putin was HRC's uranium deal, and the bigger embarrassment was Obama saying on Oct. 16, 2016 that Russia would be 'no threat' to our election and only an unbalanced person would believe so. Obama told Trump at that time to stop whining about Russia and make the case to the American people for Presidential votes. Gotta sting to be the ex-POTUS watching your 8 year socialist plan deconstructed by a guy you just mocked with no chance to win the election.
And now CNN is openly reamed with the recent hidden camera sting... the anti-Trump conspiracy regarding this Russian garbage. Gotta be tough to be a liberal these days...lies, conspiracy and violence.
Comedy gold, one can't make this stuff up.
 
Last edited:
Why are people surprised about this? This was one of his core campaign promises, and he pulled it off. It's just another thing to add to the pile of mistakes that he has created.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top