Just so you know - more Americans wanted Hillary Clinton than Donald Trump as POTUS

[Sean Renaud]

Notching up the socialism cannot create an environment where you would have a lot more money. By definition Socialism kills individual incentive. Without individual incentive, production falls. Always. Not some of the time. Always. You can try to fix that with oversight and reeducation camps but then now you're spending time money and effort and personnel on guards, retraining, guns, prisons, and torture.

I don't believe that to be born out by the facts. I know people like to claim that but upward mobility is better in European nations than it is in the US. I think it's fairly obvious that getting more people better educated you will get better results.

I don't need re-education camps to convince people to have better lives.

 

[Conager]

We have better resources than Venuezuala, which people forget fell because Obama decided to fuck them. Nobody survives in the Western Hemisphere with America actively fucking you.

We would probably notch up the socialism, but we also wouldn't be supporting all the red states so we'd have a lot more money.

I just realized that I skimmed past the point that you were making the point you're making is that California is a next exporter of federal dollars as it currently stands and of course those dollars remaining in California provides more actual money to distribute to Californians or not collect at all.

Valid.

The problem with those numbers as well as the positive numbers that would result theoretically for Texas being its own country and so forth is they don't really take into account indirect pork.

With 55 electorial votes and an awful lot of Representatives California has a major seat at the Appropriations table. Which is why defense contractors get located in California to ensure that the money keeps flowing.

Same with Texas Nevada and really a lot of the major Electoral College States. Some Senator has ensure that this defense planter that defense plant is located in their state. That helps the economy of that state and it goes away if the entire country doesn't exist as it currently does with the ability to spend $1 for every $0.60 of actual tax revenue that it collects.

 

[OldJourno]

I say we give Donald Trump the same respect he gave Obama.

That will keep Trump up at night, guaranteed.

 

[Conager]

I don't believe that to be born out by the facts. I know people like to claim that but upward mobility is better in European nations than it is in the US. I think it's fairly obvious that getting more people better educated you will get better results.

I don't need re-education camps to convince people to have better lives.

You can't use lily-white Scandinavia as a valid example for what would happen in America if you simply through more government money and control at the problem.

Europe also benefits because America greedily hogs all of the responsibility for their defense in our budget. Because we want to keep those military industrial complex contractors well fed.

where we go to reprioritize a lot of that spending I could see that being much more productive for our society. A million-dollar Tomahawk missile launch from a nuclear sub off someone's coastline to destroy a mud hut that cost maybe several hundred dollars to construct hurts us a lot more than it hurts them. We gained nothing from that expenditure. The fact that some military contractor got paid 1000000 dollars that we borrowed is good for him but it has no net benefit to the American economy.

after the missile has been used or even worse it just sits in inventory it has no productive use. you have a few jobs guarding the thing a few jobs transporting the thing a few jobs launching the thing a few jobs flying planes to evaluate the damage that it did to the mud hut a few jobs analyzing the photos from the planes that took the pictures down like the damage. But it's not at all like building a factory that's going to make something useful. Preferably a factory that makes other factories or machine tools or something.

 

[RoryN]

Here we go...the illegitimate President shtick is right around the corner.

Just like 2008 then.

Burn!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

LT, if you factor out the People's Republic of California, where the vote is rather one-sided, more Americans wanted Trump.



~sorry~

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

PS - The people of California enjoy the type of government they want to impose on us and it is growing. As people of means leave, illegals are flooding in creating a dangerous and bankrupt state of affairs...

 

[Real_American21]

Clinton got more votes than Trump.

We don't count votes from nonAmericans, sorry nigger!

 

[ryan8558]

That will keep Trump up at night, guaranteed.

Wonder how much he'll be up tweeting after he gets in office?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Wonder how much he'll be up tweeting after he gets in office?

I would hope that all of that ends on January 20.

​

 

[bgdick68]

Here's what happened

The people who vote spoke loud and clear. The rest of the fucking lazy ass Americans do what they do the best--sit on their fucking asses and do nothing.

 

[Disgustipated]

PS - The people of California enjoy the type of government they want to impose on us and it is growing. As people of means leave, illegals are flooding in creating a dangerous and bankrupt state of affairs...

You're poor, elderly and live in a poor redneck state. Your shit opinion on California that you read on American Thinker has been duly noted and tossed aside.

 

[phrodeau]

"It's a rigged system, folks. Nobody wins except by cheating."

 

[pmichael]

 

[Conager]

"It's a rigged system, folks. Nobody wins except by cheating."

Pretty clever, no?

Cheating the pollsters, so the Democrats wouldn't know where to cheat, and by how much?

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

The people who vote spoke loud and clear. The rest of the fucking lazy ass Americans do what they do the best--sit on their fucking asses and do nothing.

Yup and most Americans voted for Clinton.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

We don't count votes from nonAmericans, sorry nigger!

Hey peckerwood, you people won't be in the majority after 2043. Guess what, you or your kids will pay for what you did here.

 

[QueenLevitra]

Wonder how much he'll be up tweeting after he gets in office?

He won't have much time for sleep let alone tweets is my guess.

Rude awakening for the wannabe dicktator and his porn star 3rd wife.

 

[missemily]

Doesn't matter, we don't live in a mob rules democracy.

O yes the mob rule of democracy fear. Lets look at that.

So couple hundred years ago the Founding Fathers feared couple things about going with democracy which caused them to become republic instead.

Fears:

1) That larger states will be able to control and rule the semi-centralized federal government[1].

2) That a populist local [2] official will get swept into office and rule by decree protected by his voter base back at home. This will block the smaller states from getting there voices heard [3].

3) Founding Fathers knew there was no good way to decide who can vote and who couldn't. So instead they decided to go with actually officials. These would be men who would be educated, elected by the people, knew the issues and...

4) Wouldn't be bound to follow the actual popular vote nor a political party[4]. Founding Fathers didn't like political parties. One of reasons 13 Colonies was so mismanaged was due to the politic appointments done by British Parliament, which was primarily controlled by well British gentry [5]




Mob rule of democracy can only happen in one from of the many different forms of democracy and thats direct democracy. Which I hear Swiss are doing quite well at without lynch mobs or anything. Well okay ever so often the one racist law gets by in area but i don't know enough about Swiss system to talk about it

However there are other forms of democracy which are much better and don't let someone win by just getting 24% of the popular vote (yes this is mathematically possible) or don't have fail rate of 7% (4 elections have had the person with the popular vote lose to someone who won the College)


[1]At this point the United States was more like the EU (before the Euro) then single nation state, each state was even printing and minting its own coinage.

[2] Travel was time consuming most officials and communication networks didn't really exist at this point. No telegram no pony express nothing. You had to wait for someone with news to come to you and tell you what happen

[3]This was major concern during the lead up to the Civil War hence way North and South played a game of national chess on when allowing states into the Union.

[4] Faithless electors was quite common place and even played games political chess to ensure the person they thought deserved the office of President and Vice President (remember there was time where the VP was elected and not appointed)

[5] This is complicated (Seven Year War and couple others things that make Game of Thrones look like Sesame Street) one and kinda falls back to cited point number 2. British government did care, the problem was they had no idea what the fuck was going on till someone got on boat and told them what was going on. For instance the Stamp Act, nullified the second Parliament heard what Grenville did. With good smack down from William Pitt the Elder. Who even commented that the Americas were right to resist and illegal tax.

Edit: I don't like double posting also just want to point out the sheer double standards this guy has

You can't use lily-white Scandinavia as a valid example for what would happen in America if you simply through more government money and control at the problem.

Europe also benefits because America greedily hogs all of the responsibility for their defense in our budget. Because we want to keep those military industrial complex contractors well fed.

where we go to reprioritize a lot of that spending I could see that being much more productive for our society. A million-dollar Tomahawk missile launch from a nuclear sub off someone's coastline to destroy a mud hut that cost maybe several hundred dollars to construct hurts us a lot more than it hurts them. We gained nothing from that expenditure. The fact that some military contractor got paid 1000000 dollars that we borrowed is good for him but it has no net benefit to the American economy.

after the missile has been used or even worse it just sits in inventory it has no productive use. you have a few jobs guarding the thing a few jobs transporting the thing a few jobs launching the thing a few jobs flying planes to evaluate the damage that it did to the mud hut a few jobs analyzing the photos from the planes that took the pictures down like the damage. But it's not at all like building a factory that's going to make something useful. Preferably a factory that makes other factories or machine tools or something.

Funny you talk like you don't like military industrial complex yet you support Trump. Someone who has said he wants to INCREASE SPENDING ON THE MILITARY.

Yes increase. Now he isn't increasing spending on NATO or Japan or South Korea. That leaves two options to where money will be going. To industrial complex or in wars. Now war just uses up equipment and money. In fact no nation ever has won a war and not had several income issues afterwards for quite sometime now. I think last one was all the way back in Roman Era but I need to look it up.

The more likely option increase in military budget. The House and Senate will love this one. They love burning money on F-35 Lightning (aka the piece of junk that loses to loaded down F-16), which am sure he just love throwing money at. Even though unmanned drones, missiles, spec ops, and cyber warfare are easily beating the old planes, boats and tanks. But then again everyone is ready to fight the last war.

 

[Liar]

Fun with numbers:

Trump and Clinton both got less support from voters than Romney got when he lost in 2012.
As a percentage of eligble voters, even less so.

 

[QueenLevitra]

Fun with numbers:

Trump and Clinton both got less support from voters than Romney got when he lost in 2012.
As a percentage of eligble voters, even less so.

That is not fun and yet right about now I'd put up my net worth and my pussy to make that happen.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

Wont it just be the frosting on the cake if, after all the votes are counted, He wins the popular vote as well?

What LJ is too stupid, as always, to get is that 8% of the vote has not been counted. At the current margin it will all depend were the vote comes from. Military overseas, CA, Texas??

She had 59,755,284 votes, according to CNN's tally, with 92% of the expected vote counted. Trump had 59,535,522. That difference of 219,762

With 9.5 mill left to count...

So he wins these votes 51.5 to 48.5 guess what happens?

 

[Real_American21]

Hey peckerwood, you people won't be in the majority after 2043. Guess what, you or your kids will pay for what you did here.

Nonsense, silly nigger the world is for whites.

Your kind will be gone, and paradise shall spread across the universe.

 

[Liar]

Wont it just be the frosting on the cake if, after all the votes are counted, He wins the popular vote as well?

What LJ is too stupid, as always, to get is that 8% of the vote has not been counted. At the current margin it will all depend were the vote comes from. Military overseas, CA, Texas??

She had 59,755,284 votes, according to CNN's tally, with 92% of the expected vote counted. Trump had 59,535,522. That difference of 219,762

With 9.5 mill left to count...

So he wins these votes 51.5 to 48.5 guess what happens?

The states with most left to count are California and Washington.

So... possibly, but not likely.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

The states with most left to count are California and Washington.

So... possibly, but not likely.

4 mill from those two states, estimated, 5 from the rest of the country....

Unlikely? Probably

But that doesn't change the fact this thread is premature at best....