User Tag List

Page 7 of 81 FirstFirst ... 456789101757 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 1206

Thread: Trump Has A Mandate

  1. #91
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    18,303
    Thanks
    1,338
    Thanked 4,348 Times in 3,267 Posts

    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147694
    democracy

  2. #92
    Over 3000 post club Jose Fly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    3,766
    Thanks
    25
    Thanked 521 Times in 366 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    173268
    Quote Originally Posted by jeffblue101 View Post
    if Obama was so good
    Obviously he was, since a solid majority of the country approves of the job he's done.

    then democrats would not have lost control of the majority of U.S. legislative bodies.
    You're assuming that the election was first and foremost a referendum on Obama. He wasn't on the ballot, and the candidate who was running to continue his policies had her own well-documented issues. Further, it's not unusual for a two-term president's party to loose ground at the end of his term. Two terms of one party in the WH typically motivates the other side.

    The "third term of Obama" would have never come close to losing swing states if the approval rating actually meant something.
    I see....approval ratings don't mean anything. Yet another data set conservatives try and make go away when it doesn't tell them what they want to hear.
    "The way to deal with superstition is not to be polite to it, but to tackle it with all arms, and so rout it, cripple it, and make it forever infamous and ridiculous." --H.L. Mencken

  3. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Jose Fly For Your Post:

    Alate_One (December 17th, 2016),annabenedetti (December 17th, 2016),kmoney (December 17th, 2016)

  4. #93
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    7,390
    Thanks
    124
    Thanked 1,325 Times in 1,093 Posts

    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by rexlunae View Post
    If there were good evidence of cheating or over-counting in favor of Democrats in a state that Republicans won, why do you suppose Republicans and the Trump campaign sued to stop the recount? Shouldn't we go ahead with a recount if it has the potential to uncover fraud? For that matter, what makes you so sure the discrepancy was due to pro-Clinton cheating?
    It's pretty simple, actually.

    The headline reads:
    'Democrats are crooks'

    Why should anyone want to suffer a recount when they've prevailed

  5. #94
    Silver Member kmoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    A farm
    Posts
    10,362
    Thanks
    1,175
    Thanked 2,423 Times in 1,284 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    1159585
    Quote Originally Posted by Jose Fly View Post
    You're assuming that the election was first and foremost a referendum on Obama. He wasn't on the ballot, and the candidate who was running to continue his policies had her own well-documented issues.
    Right. The election result could be more about Clinton than Obama, though a continuation of Obama's policies was a factor.

    Obama said that he'd take a Clinton loss personally but that may have simply been an attempt to make sure his supporters went out for Clinton also.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to kmoney For Your Post:

    patrick jane (December 17th, 2016)

  7. #95
    Over 2000 post club Alate_One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,464
    Thanks
    109
    Thanked 220 Times in 168 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    93634
    Quote Originally Posted by kmoney View Post
    Right. The election result could be more about Clinton than Obama, though a continuation of Obama's policies was a factor.

    Obama said that he'd take a Clinton loss personally but that may have simply been an attempt to make sure his supporters went out for Clinton also.
    The election was close enough it could be considered to be "about" dozens of different things. Comey's letter, the media's obsession with Trump and his twitter feed to the exclusion of all else. One thing I would say is almost certain, it had very little to do with the policies of either candidate, because they were basically not talked about by the media. Everything was about personality "corruption" and the like.
    “We do not believe in God because we need to explain this or that feature of the world. That is what science is for. We believe in God because we see something deeper in the world, something that transcends the scientific explanations.” - Karl Giberson Ph.D.

    Some of the Evidence for Climate Change

    The Biologos Foundation - The science and faith of theistic evolution explained.

    What Darwin Never Knew

  8. #96
    TOL Legend patrick jane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    homeless
    Posts
    28,213
    Thanks
    13,146
    Thanked 14,369 Times in 11,419 Posts

    Blog Entries
    27
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Tagged
    5 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147802
    Hacking did not affect the election in any way
    1 Corinthians 15:1-2 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV -


    Colossians 1:13-14 KJV - Colossians 1:15-16 KJV - Colossians 1:17-18 KJV -

    Colossians 1:19-20 KJV - Colossians 1:21-22 KJV - Colossians 1:23 KJV -

    Colossians 1:25-26 KJV 27, 28, 29 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Ephesians 1:12-13, 14 -



  9. #97
    Over 2000 post club Alate_One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,464
    Thanks
    109
    Thanked 220 Times in 168 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    93634
    Quote Originally Posted by patrick jane View Post
    Hacking did not affect the election in any way
    Not directly. But the repeated information dumps kept the spotlight OFF of policy differences between the candidates.
    “We do not believe in God because we need to explain this or that feature of the world. That is what science is for. We believe in God because we see something deeper in the world, something that transcends the scientific explanations.” - Karl Giberson Ph.D.

    Some of the Evidence for Climate Change

    The Biologos Foundation - The science and faith of theistic evolution explained.

    What Darwin Never Knew

  10. #98
    Over 1000 post club Quincy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    1,452
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 83 Times in 69 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    78058
    Quote Originally Posted by Alate_One View Post
    Not directly. But the repeated information dumps kept the spotlight OFF of policy differences between the candidates.
    Didn't our traditional news media do a far better job of that, though? It's just that, I have a hard time believing enough people to affect the election outcome actually paid any attention to dumb stuff dumped onto social media. There were some stuff from wikileaks that made the main news but, I don't know. It seemed like the traditional media covered the negative things far too much and in the end, none of it would really mattered because working class people and many progressives lost their connection with the democrats.
    I'm not a sinner, or preacher, all I have is slight of hand.

  11. #99
    Over 5000 post club rexlunae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The high desert
    Posts
    5,014
    Thanks
    977
    Thanked 2,097 Times in 1,343 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    796224
    Quote Originally Posted by patrick jane View Post
    Hacking did not affect the election in any way
    You don't think John Podesta's email played a part? Or some of the DNC emails?
    Last edited by rexlunae; December 31st, 2016 at 11:12 PM.
    Global warming denialists are like gravity denialists piloting a helicopter, determined to prove a point. We may not have time to actually persuade them of their mistake.

  12. #100
    Resident Rocket Surgeon rocketman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,831
    Thanks
    262
    Thanked 1,645 Times in 1,149 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147616
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post

    That's an assertion/assumption. No serious study has ever indicated a statistically valid problem of election tipping fraud in our national history. Until that's sustained it's just political gamesmanship, whichever side is complaining.
    An assertion yes but, no more of an assertion than claiming victory to a standard that can not be validated in either case. This is what I would assert as an impasse.



    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    So Reagan, Bill, etc. can absolutely rest on their popular mandates and Hillary can rightly note that absent some proof to the contrary, millions more desired to see her ensconced than the fellow who won the land over hands contest.
    Ronald Reagan saw two landslide victories and I believe that 525 electoral votes has never been exceeded, Bill Clinton also saw a marginally large EC vote at 379, it would conclude that both saw wide support across the board. Different times and certainly a different country, Trump cannot claim an EC landslide because it was not but, his party by holding all three branches after this fistfight of an election can claim the mandate, and so it will be fulfilled.

    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    You keep doing that, rm. You need to read me more widely because this is the second time you've missed the mark widely. I actually and repeatedly called for people not to vote for either. I didn't want either of these snake oil salesmen in the White House, so I'd be sour by either margin. I called her a near perfect storm of everything I dislike in politicians. Trump? As bad if in a different approach.
    Fair enough, sorry I lumped you in with the sour grapes crowd. Trump was never my pick either but, I would have voted for anyone that would have denied Clinton's candidacy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    But you're not being fair about the demographic. Hillary had a lot of support outside of cities. Over half the electorate went with her and a good bit of that electorate doesn't live inside a few urban centers. It's just that this was, relatively speaking, a really close election.The concentrations were enough to help Trump carry areas outside of them, many of those by not so much. Anyway, a win is a win, close or by a mile.
    And yet we look at the voting map by county and it is almost exclusively liberal urban centers i.e. big cities where she saw her votes. The lines might not be there when you fly over but, they tell a story when you look at a map now don't they?

    http://metrocosm.com/election-2016-map-3d/


    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    See, that's funny. You want "mob rule" too, only you like the way we've imagined carving up that mob. There's no magic in the EC. It's only reflecting that carving.
    That is funny I thought I was speaking against the mob and for the constitutional system that served this nation well for over 200 years.


    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    I'd conclude that when you look at the demographics of the party and the opposition you have a problem over the long haul. Obama was terrific as a rallying point for conservatives. Now the voices that made their living saying no and pointing fingers have the opportunity to put up and make their case.

    Interesting times to live in.
    Neither I nor the republican party have the problem, the problem lies with the opposition that is slowly losing control of every government branch local, state by state, & nationally also holding their ideologic upper hand in the courts. It is all bad for them from where I am looking at this, the problem lies in pushing ideology, political correctness & minority rule upon an entire nation...it is being wholly rejected as we speak... Interesting times indeed.
    The winner of the 2011 Truthsmacker of the Year Award



    Help Take Back Our Country from Washington D.C.. with the Convention of States

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to rocketman For Your Post:

    patrick jane (December 17th, 2016)

  14. #101
    Over 2000 post club Alate_One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,464
    Thanks
    109
    Thanked 220 Times in 168 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    93634
    Quote Originally Posted by Quincy View Post
    Didn't our traditional news media do a far better job of that, though? It's just that, I have a hard time believing enough people to affect the election outcome actually paid any attention to dumb stuff dumped onto social media.
    That's the thing. Our traditional media DIDN'T do a good job of it, they kept harping on nothingburger stories like e-mails.

    Here are word clouds taken from a poll of 30,000 people on what they remembered hearing about each candidate.





    It's pretty clear why Trump won, and it didn't have anything to do with policy differences.
    “We do not believe in God because we need to explain this or that feature of the world. That is what science is for. We believe in God because we see something deeper in the world, something that transcends the scientific explanations.” - Karl Giberson Ph.D.

    Some of the Evidence for Climate Change

    The Biologos Foundation - The science and faith of theistic evolution explained.

    What Darwin Never Knew

  15. #102
    Out of Order Town Heretic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Within a whisper of rivers...
    Posts
    18,929
    Thanks
    2,875
    Thanked 6,353 Times in 3,729 Posts

    Blog Entries
    15
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147798
    Quote Originally Posted by rocketman View Post
    An assertion yes but, no more of an assertion than claiming victory to a standard that can not be validated in either case. This is what I would assert as an impasse.
    Except we aren't on equal footing, rm. You want to presume an inequity in process that's never found validation. Absent that, it's reasonable to trust the process. But if you felt you couldn't trust the process absent proof of a negative you couldn't then trust the outcome through the EC, which again is only a reflection of those numbers, filtered through a process that negates the lesser of two sums.

    Ronald Reagan saw two landslide victories and I believe that 525 electoral votes has never been exceeded, Bill Clinton also saw a marginally large EC vote at 379, it would conclude that both saw wide support across the board. Different times and certainly a different country, Trump cannot claim an EC landslide because it was not but, his party by holding all three branches after this fistfight of an election can claim the mandate, and so it will be fulfilled.
    Again, claiming a mandate when more voters were against you than for you and your party lost seats simply doesn't add up. It's at best a party mandate, which he had when he won the nomination.

    Fair enough, sorry I lumped you in with the sour grapes crowd. Trump was never my pick either but, I would have voted for anyone that would have denied Clinton's candidacy.
    In order, not a problem, I'll always let you know if you have me wrong on a point and on the nominees...

    And yet we look at the voting map by county and it is almost exclusively liberal urban centers i.e. big cities where she saw her votes. The lines might not be there when you fly over but, they tell a story when you look at a map now don't they?
    Well, sure. But an awful lot of land with fewer people shouldn't be more entitled or powerful than more people more heavily concentrated.

    That is funny I thought I was speaking against the mob and for the constitutional system that served this nation well for over 200 years.
    I got that, but you really weren't, since as you noted for most of that, almost all of it, the EC has rubber stamped popular opinion. And the EC itself is a reflection of popular vote, constrained not by some larger operation of principle, but by the curious notion that where you live can be more important than how many of you live there.

    Neither I nor the republican party have the problem, the problem lies with the opposition that is slowly losing control of every government branch local, state by state, & nationally also holding their ideologic upper hand in the courts.
    Except that ignores the small losses at the national level, the aging and necessarily diminishing power of your demographic, it's problem among minorities and the young, etc.

    It is all bad for them from where I am looking at this, the problem lies in pushing ideology, political correctness & minority rule upon an entire nation...it is being wholly rejected as we speak... Interesting times indeed.
    The main problem with that summation is that the EC just pushed minority control of the nation (less than half the electorate, etc.) every party pushes ideology or they'd be unaffiliated, and if not for the unintentional gerrymandering effect the nation would have once again put a president of one party in play against a Congress ruled by the opposition.
    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life







  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Town Heretic For Your Post:

    rexlunae (December 31st, 2016)

  17. #103
    Over 1000 post club Quincy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    1,452
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 83 Times in 69 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    78058
    Quote Originally Posted by Alate_One View Post

    It's pretty clear why Trump won, and it didn't have anything to do with policy differences.
    Just to be clear, I agree that it wasn't the policy matters that made the decision, for most people at least. I think that in coal country and the industrial midwest/heartland, it mattered but not that much outside those areas. It just doesn't seem like hacking (and fake news for that matter) hurt as badly as some people think. Hillary defeated herself, just look at the emphasis on emails in the graphic. I don't think that's all about the Podesta scandal, very little of it is. It's all about the private email server. Her own mistakes buried her. At any rate, if she had not ignored some states, gotten more in touch with normal people and not let the traditional media make the last two years all about Trump 24/7 then we may have had a different outcome, than this Republican Washington and their perceived mandate.
    I'm not a sinner, or preacher, all I have is slight of hand.

  18. #104
    Out of Order Town Heretic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Within a whisper of rivers...
    Posts
    18,929
    Thanks
    2,875
    Thanked 6,353 Times in 3,729 Posts

    Blog Entries
    15
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147798
    Quote Originally Posted by Quincy View Post
    Just to be clear, I agree that it wasn't the policy matters that made the decision, for most people at least. I think that in coal country and the industrial midwest/heartland, it mattered but not that much outside those areas. It just doesn't seem like hacking (and fake news for that matter) hurt as badly as some people think. Hillary defeated herself, just look at the emphasis on emails in the graphic. I don't think that's all about the Podesta scandal, very little of it is. It's all about the private email server. Her own mistakes buried her. At any rate, if she had not ignored some states, gotten more in touch with normal people and not let the traditional media make the last two years all about Trump 24/7 then we may have had a different outcome, than this Republican Washington and their perceived mandate.
    To me it's simple. She got the numbers, but not the distribution. She could have had both had she been less arrogant and not played crooked politics within her party. That led to some Bernie support defection. In an election where the margins mattered, it cost her.
    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life







  19. #105
    Over 2000 post club Alate_One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,464
    Thanks
    109
    Thanked 220 Times in 168 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    93634
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    To me it's simple. She got the numbers, but not the distribution. She could have had both had she been less arrogant and not played crooked politics within her party. That led to some Bernie support defection. In an election where the margins mattered, it cost her.
    Arrogance in believing the polls which had been right so often. But yes she got greedy when she should have shored up her base. But had the Comey letter not happened, she might have been proved right.

    Bernie did not help matters in refusing to concede and promoting the narrative that the nomination could be "stolen" from him. The leadership didn't want him to win yes, but there wasn't nearly the dirty politics that was claimed by his side.
    “We do not believe in God because we need to explain this or that feature of the world. That is what science is for. We believe in God because we see something deeper in the world, something that transcends the scientific explanations.” - Karl Giberson Ph.D.

    Some of the Evidence for Climate Change

    The Biologos Foundation - The science and faith of theistic evolution explained.

    What Darwin Never Knew

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to Alate_One For Your Post:

    rexlunae (December 31st, 2016)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us