Cable Forum - U.S Election 2016

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - U.S Election 2016 (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33702280)

Re: US Election 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35871393)

This is also the second time it's happened in the last 20 years. It's a problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35871369)

Hit the nail on the head there Martyn. Who on earth would vote for that unknown? The penny will drop soon that we're in deep 'do do's'.

Who on Earth ? Clearly Over 17 Million people did. The penny won't drop either and we won't be in do do's.

You go on and on :zzz: about the leavers being uneducated, which is bollocks by the way, but I can't understand for the life of me why, if you profess to be educated, you want to remain in a corrupted entity as the EU that will collapse at some point in the future, surely it's smart to jump the sinking ship ? Anyway, brexit thread over there >>> :rolleyes:

Re: US Election 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35871392)

Agreed - I was just clarifying an incorrect assertion.

I was referring to Brexit ;)

Re: US Election 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35871394)

The reason why something is created is often different than the reason it persists. The USA has many examples of that principle - gun ownership being one of them. The continuing constitutional right to bear arms has precisely nothing to do with the likelihood of an attempt by the British to recolonise. In our own country, arguments for retaining the monarchy would be unrecognisable to someone like Alfred the Great. Both times in the last 20 years the mismatch between the popular vote and the college has favoured the Republicans. It remains to be seen whether a future democrat president will attempt to change it.

It's also favored the Democrats in 2012 although it didn't change the winner.

It's fair enough to separate the reasons as to why it was set up from why it should persist. I was addressing people who invoke the reasons it was set-up.

Anyway it shouldn't persist either because I don't believe the reasons people use are valid. First of all there is the argument you cited a few posts back that it helps people in smaller states be the focus of a campaign as opposed to high population areas. It doesn't. All it does it narrow the focus to a handful of swing states but with the exception of New Hampshire these states are actually pretty big. Look at this election. The campaigns focused on Florida (4th most populated state), Ohio (7th), North Carolina (10th), Pennsylvania (5th) and to lesser extents Michigan (9th), Nevada (35th) and New Hampshire (42nd). You have two exceptions there but otherwise the states that were paid the most attention where in the top 10 population wise.

The other argument people use is that it prevents the tyranny of the majority. As has already been mentioned it prevents the election being decided by those on the coasts. However the United States already has a mechanism for ensuring equality of the states - the Senate. Why does it need two? At what point does this become the tyranny of the minority instead?

In reality of course the election is decided by a handful of voters in a handful of the states. America is so partisan than only they matter as the rest goes blue/red no matter what.

---------- Post added at 09:11 ---------- Previous post was at 09:01 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35871400)

I find it bemusing that had the result of this Election gone the other way, Clinton wins by College vote, but Trump wins the Popular vote, the lefties would not even be bringing up this argument at all. They are trying any which way they can to try and steal the Presidency back to Hillary.[:

I doubt Trump would have taken an Electoral college defeat well either. He wasn't too happy with it in 2012 when it seemed, for a brief moment, Obama would win the election but not the Popular Vote.

By the way with your own argument the 'lefities' wouldn't be stealing the election. The Electoral College was designed in such a way that the electors can override the will of their states. This was the intention of the founding fathers. It's obviously a rubbish idea and not one I am advocating but an example of why the EC is stupid.

---------- Post added at 09:22 ---------- Previous post was at 09:11 ----------

Anyway it's not all bad: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/ne...n-us-kbtt33v2k

Quote:

He said that he wanted his country back but now Nigel Farage is planning to abandon it in favour of a new life in the United States.

The interim Ukip leader, who is due to hand over the reins to a permanent replacement on Monday, has told friends that he is preparing to emigrate with his wife, Kirsten. Despite a long-held interest in the US, he has felt tied to Westerham, his home town in Kent, and his family in Britain. His roles as an MEP and leader of Ukip have also made it difficult to be based abroad.

Re: US Election 2016

Does that mean he will wait until Brexit and he is no longer an MEP or does he plan to still get paid and emigrate to the US in the meantime?

Re: US Election 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35871400)

No it is not, North America has vast amounts of rural areas compared to major densely populated Cities, like Miami and New York.

The Founding Fathers got it right hundreds of years ago, because if it went with the popular vote, only certain mass populated areas get to decide on a candidate and that is not right.

Even Hillary, in her Concession speech said the US Election system is a cherished system enshrined in to the Constitution and the result has to be accepted and respected.

As I have said elsewhere in this thread, the population in America is not spread out evenly and this is why the Electoral College exists.

I find it bemusing that had the result of this Election gone the other way, Clinton wins by College vote, but Trump wins the Popular vote, the lefties would not even be bringing up this argument at all. They are trying any which way they can to try and steal the Presidency back to Hillary.

---------- Post added at 04:38 ---------- Previous post was at 04:21 ----------

Who on Earth ? Clearly Over 17 Million people did. The penny won't drop either and we won't be in do do's.

You go on and on :zzz: about the leavers being uneducated, which is bollocks by the way, but I can't understand for the life of me why, if you profess to be educated, you want to remain in a corrupted entity as the EU that will collapse at some point in the future, surely it's smart to jump the sinking ship ? Anyway, brexit thread over there >>> :rolleyes:

What is bollocks is being unable to accept that someone else who holds a different point of view is incapable of being "educated"

Re: US Election 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35871333)

Brexit is pure guesswork we have no idea how it will work or how long it will take

it will be completed March 2019.

Re: US Election 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35871413)

By the way with your own argument the 'lefities' wouldn't be stealing the election. The Electoral College was designed in such a way that the electors can override the will of their states. This was the intention of the founding fathers. It's obviously a rubbish idea and not one I am advocating but an example of why the EC is stupid.

I am not saying they would steal the election but they WANT to try, that is what I am on about. This talk of having faithless electors, ignoring their own States voting intentions and voting for Hillary instead, wouldn't work with a Republican controlled congress which has final say on the College votes, would just void any Rogue college electors and insist Trump becomes the 45th President of the United States.

breaking news in US Elections

Breaking news from USA Elections

There have been requests for recounts in THREE STATES in the US. In Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and another state.

Its on BBC News as Breaking News. Cannot find link

---------- Post added at 22:42 ---------- Previous post was at 22:38 ----------

http://news.sky.com/story/green-part...onsin-10672212

Also on BBC news

Re: breaking news in US Elections

Won't make a difference to the result.

Re: US Election 2016

It will. IF they recount and it is found that Clinton won all 3, then she is President.

I find it amazing that the same people who slammed Trump for not saying he would accept a Democrat win are now refusing to accept a Republican win. OK she won the popular vote but that means diddly squat in American politics.

Re: US Election 2016

There is no basis in fact for the recounts. There is no evidence of any sort.

As far as a straight vote count is concerned, how many extra votes did Clinton get because certain states had a referendum on marijuana at the same time? How many people in California only went to vote on the referendum, but also voted for Clinton? Should a Presidential vote be separate from any other local issues?

Re: US Election 2016

Quote:

Green Party spokesman George Martin said: "There's no smoking gun here, but we're saying the American public needs to have it investigated to make sure our votes count."

Just the Green party not happy so won't change anything.

Re: US Election 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35871855)

Just the Green party not happy so won't change anything.

sour grapes then because Trump says global warming is a lie ;)

Re: US Election 2016

Jill Stein is only doing this to check the integrity of the vote count in those States. She is no fan of Hillary or Trump, but she did have concerns about the prospect of Hillary becoming President and potential of her going to war with Russia, dragging the rest of the World in to a bloody messy nuclear conflict.

Re: US Election 2016

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35871863)

As if she would be complaining if Clinton had won, and certainly she couldn't have raised the money if that had been the case.