Trump discussion - Page 3
Page 3 of 153 FirstFirst 123451353103 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 1530

Thread: Trump discussion

  1. #21
    Senior Member olivaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    2,488
    Quote Originally Posted by Nelley View Post
    Wow-thanks for the info-I guess all this talk about the US economy was just a waste of time-everybody is swimming in cash-LOL.
    Was the second entry in my list too subtle for you?

    If you have something to say - then say.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,484
    Quote Originally Posted by olivaw View Post
    Was the second entry in my list too subtle for you?
    More like too stupid-even MSM economists admit that the big potential payoff is in Trump's plan to take a meat cleaver to guv regulations that are strangling the economy, the huge corp tax cut and even the income tax cut. Jeez-the guy is planning to chop 10.5 trillion in wasteful guv spending-you don't notice this because you are too busy studying the Southern Poverty B/S.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,094
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty O'Toole View Post
    Trump is a lot smarter than people give him credit for. His persuasion game was on point (see Scott 'Dilbert' Adams blog for particulars) he addressed the concerns of middle America (jobs, immigration, security, patriotism) he took it on the road and did rallies in every state, particularly areas that had been abused and neglected by the Democrats. He made himself talked about in the media by sensational statements and garnered billions in free publicity. If he were an established politician commentators would be talking about what a masterful campaign he ran.

    Obama and Clinton talked about things like letting trans sexuals use the girls bathroom and how the country owed Clinton the Presidency. She did lots of fund raisers for billionaires and Democrat insiders, hardly any rallies and when she did, drew crowds in the dozens to hundreds. Then there was the general air of graft and corruption that hung over her.

    The media, limousine liberals and political pundits were shocked and surprised that the peasants failed to vote the way they told them to. But in retrospect it is not that surprising.
    Wow, it sounds like Trump did an excellent job of convincing American voters, but obviously Clinton did an even more excellent job since she won 2.9 million more votes than Trump did.

    It seems like a lot of the peasants saw through Trump's rise of "elect a billionaire who will appoint a bunch of billionaires to fix the system that made them all billionaires".

    Fortunately for the billionaires, the electoral college doesn't reflect the will of the people.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    CanadianMoneyForum.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    With Nellie
    Posts
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by Davis View Post
    Wow, it sounds like Trump did an excellent job of convincing American voters, but obviously Clinton did an even more excellent job since she won 2.9 million more votes than Trump did.

    It seems like a lot of the peasants saw through Trump's rise of "elect a billionaire who will appoint a bunch of billionaires to fix the system that made them all billionaires".

    Fortunately for the billionaires, the electoral college doesn't reflect the will of the people.
    Thankfully the broader spectrum of Americans have their views represented, rather than the canned views of the populace in a handful of major cities.

    Clinton's biggest appeal was that she wasn't Trump.

    If anything, it shows how pathetic her campaign was that she couldn't beat him.

  6. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    3,791
    Wow, it sounds like Trump did an excellent job of convincing American voters, but obviously Clinton did an even more excellent job since she won 2.9 million more votes than Trump did.

    It seems like a lot of the peasants saw through Trump's rise of "elect a billionaire who will appoint a bunch of billionaires to fix the system that made them all billionaires".

    Fortunately for the billionaires, the electoral college doesn't reflect the will of the people.
    ^ this argument line is meaningless. Not only did the election happen already and in accordance with the rules, candidates campaigned based on said rules. Had the rules been different, they would have focused on different, more populous states. In the real world rules were deliberately designed to give smaller states heavier representation, a bit like with Nunavut or Newfoundland and our Parliament.

    There is one winner and he reflects the will of the people in the United States. Bitching about the rules is kinda funny so don't let me distract you.
    Last edited by mordko; 2017-01-23 at 08:41 PM.

  7. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,094
    The point that I'm making is that when people pontificate about how Trump was able win Americans' votes because he said this or did that and Clinton didn't, they miss the point that she won a hell of a lot more votes than he did - 66 million votes is more than 63 million votes.

    Yes, he won the presidency, and will get to govern, but it's not like he represents Americans more than she does - unless you believe that the Silent Majority is somehow smaller than the Vocal Minority.

    He is president, but he does not reflect the will of the people or have a mandate from the people.

  8. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    10,074
    Quote Originally Posted by bobsyouruncle View Post
    Thankfully the broader spectrum of Americans have their views represented, rather than the canned views of the populace in a handful of major cities.

    Clinton's biggest appeal was that she wasn't Trump.

    If anything, it shows how pathetic her campaign was that she couldn't beat him.
    In other words, and to paraphrase, all American voters are equal, but some are more equal than others.

  9. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    1,399
    He won most of America and a few overpopulated areas gave their votes to Hillary. Cities I would think want different things then those in smaller centres and towns would want. So the system as it was set up was meant to represent all of America and not just the cities.

    States without large populations would have very little say and could even express a wish to leave the US. Another point is do you really want a bunch of idiots in major cities to decide what is right for your country.

  10. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,094
    God forbid you have representation by population. That would go against everything that America was founded for.

  11. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    10,074
    Quote Originally Posted by new dog View Post
    He won most of America and a few overpopulated areas gave their votes to Hillary. Cities I would think want different things then those in smaller centres and towns would want. So the system as it was set up was meant to represent all of America and not just the cities.

    States without large populations would have very little say and could even express a wish to leave the US. Another point is do you really want a bunch of idiots in major cities to decide what is right for your country.
    You're right, one person one vote is so undemocratic. Those worthless city dwellers with their crazy ideas of having an equal say.


Page 3 of 153 FirstFirst 123451353103 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •