Former President Trump

[SteveH]

And having someone properly organised at denying rights to women and homosexuals as Pence would be would make it worse. This is a no win situation.

We'll just have to put up with Trump until 2020, then hope he can be defeated by the Democratic candidate, who will hopefully be someone with more credibility than Hil.

[Nearly Sane]

We'll just have to put up with Trump until 2020, then hope he can be defeated by the Democratic candidate, who will hopefully be someone with more credibility than Hil.

Any suggestions?

[SteveH]

Any suggestions?

I'd love Bernie again, but he's probably too old. Michelle Obama?

[Nearly Sane]

And Tweet from Richard Marx (For Littleroses - 'He is a popular beat combo, m'lud)


'I misspoke. I meant to say I “wouldn’t” be right here waiting for you.'

[Nearly Sane]

I'd love Bernie again, but he's probably too old. Michelle Obama?

I agree about Bernie. I don't like the dynastization of the presidency. Warren?

[Nearly Sane]

Sure that I won't be the only person to have made this joke but I have not seen it, so for me it is original

I wouldn't, couldn't, shouldn't are the last words of a fool

[Nearly Sane]

Randy Rainbow gets better and better. Worthy of William Schwenck:

https://youtu.be/k-LTRwZb35A

Ap-feckin-plause

[Roses]

And Tweet from Richard Marx (For Littleroses - 'He is a popular beat combo, m'lud)


'I misspoke. I meant to say I “wouldn’t” be right here waiting for you.'

What is a beat combo, and who is Bernie?

[SteveH]

Bernie Sanders.

[Nearly Sane]

What is a beat combo, and who is Bernie?

A group of syncopated musicians, and Sanders, m'lud

[Shaker]

https://tinyurl.com/yd7e9ed9

[Roses]

A group of syncopated musicians, and Sanders, m'lud

Constipated musicians, dear dear. 

Of course Bernie Sanders, I had forgotten about him, he didn't stand out from the crowd as a potential president, imo.

[Nearly Sane]

Constipated musicians, dear dear. 

Of course Bernie Sanders, I had forgotten about him, he didn't stand out from the crowd as a potential president, imo.

Except he did because of his policies.

[Rhiannon]

Except he did because of his policies.

My American friends didn't vote for Hillers because they wanted Bernie, so they didn't vote at all. I wonder how many did the same, and whether such acts of principle contributed to Trump getting in.

[Harrowby Hall]

My American friends didn't vote for Hillers because they wanted Bernie, so they didn't vote at all. I wonder how many did the same, and whether such acts of principle contributed to Trump getting in.

Hillary received 3 million more votes than Trump.

It is likely that your American friends live in either East Coast or West Coast affluent states like California or New York. It would not have mattered how many of them voted for Hillary, since the presidency is not determined by the popular vote.

The presidential Electoral College operates on an all or nothing principle - all the state votes go to the candidate who secured the most support in that state, so if Hillary received 60% of the votes  and Trump 40% of the votes in a particular state and that state has ten Electoral College voters then all ten will vote for Hillary. Trump's victory came from the fact that he secured the Electoral College votes in a large number of small states in which, relative to the overall state population there are more Electoral College places than in the large states.

The inequalities don't stop there: in some states the total state population determines the Electoral College representation, in others it is the results in individual electoral districts. Say that a state has three electoral districts, one with an electorate of 100,000, the second with 40,000 and the third with 30,000. If the two smaller ones each voted for Trump and the large one voted for Hillary, the the state's representation would support Trump.

[jeremyp]

Except he did because of his policies.

He stood out from the crowd but not as a potential president.

[jeremyp]

all the state votes go to the candidate who secured the most support in that state,

Except in Maine and Nebraska where two EC votes go to the winner of the popular vote (in the whole state) and the others are determined by the winer of the vote in each congressional district.

There's also an agreement which some states have signed up for which states that when the electoral college votes controlled by the signatories exceeds a majority of all EC votes, then the signatories' EC votes will all go to the candidate that wins the popular vote throughout the USA. i.e. that will effectively convert the presidential election into a contest based on the national popular vote, which is as it should be. The votes currently controlled by the signatories are 172 and they need 270.

[Harrowby Hall]

Fair enough, jeremyp. It is 46 years since I did the American (and Russian and British) Constitution as part of my Politics minor studies at university. I guess that there may have been some slight changes.

Anyway, thanks for that. It is interesting to see that there is not a consistent method across all the states in compiling the Electoral College votes.

[jeremyp]

Fair enough, jeremyp. It is 46 years since I did the American (and Russian and British) Constitution as part of my Politics minor studies at university. I guess that there may have been some slight changes.

The systems in Maine and Nebraska were instituted in the 90's I believe. Forty six years ago, it was probably as you said.

Anyway, thanks for that. It is interesting to see that there is not a consistent method across all the states in compiling the Electoral College votes.

Yes, I find it fascinating.

[SteveH]

Hillary received 3 million more votes than Trump.

It is likely that your American friends live in either East Coast or West Coast affluent states like California or New York. It would not have mattered how many of them voted for Hillary, since the presidency is not determined by the popular vote.

The presidential Electoral College operates on an all or nothing principle - all the state votes go to the candidate who secured the most support in that state, so if Hillary received 60% of the votes  and Trump 40% of the votes in a particular state and that state has ten Electoral College voters then all ten will vote for Hillary. Trump's victory came from the fact that he secured the Electoral College votes in a large number of small states in which, relative to the overall state population there are more Electoral College places than in the large states.

The inequalities don't stop there: in some states the total state population determines the Electoral College representation, in others it is the results in individual electoral districts. Say that a state has three electoral districts, one with an electorate of 100,000, the second with 40,000 and the third with 30,000. If the two smaller ones each voted for Trump and the large one voted for Hillary, the the state's representation would support Trump.

In short, it's absolutely bloody bonkers.

[Harrowby Hall]

There have been attempts to abolish the Electoral College and elect the president and vice president by popular vote - the most recent being a proposal by Jimmy Carter. This would mean a constitutional amendment.

The present system means that in Wyoming the votes of about 200,000 electors are required to determine each electoral college place for the state. In California about 700,000 electors are required. I can't see Donald Trump supporting any change.

[jeremyp]

There have been attempts to abolish the Electoral College and elect the president and vice president by popular vote - the most recent being a proposal by Jimmy Carter. This would mean a constitutional amendment.

Actually, a constitutional amendment is not required. Individual states can appoint their electoral college delegates in any way they see fit. If enough states to control more than half the electoral college choose to appoint their delegates on the basis of who wins the national vote, the electoral college is rendered meaningless.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact

[Harrowby Hall]

It would require the amendment or abolition of Article 2 of the Constitution of the United States of America.

[Nearly Sane]

Most republicans still think he's bigly great


https://nypost.com/2018/07/19/most-republican-voters-were-fine-with-trump-putin-summit-poll/

[jeremyp]

It would require the amendment or abolition of Article 2 of the Constitution of the United States of America.

Nope.