BEHOLD Donald Trump - Huffington Post Says He May Be Our Disguised Spiritual Leader

R

rahu

Banned
david starling said:
Still confusing. Simplifying: Should the President be elected by a National majority of qualified voters; or, should voters in less populated States have their vote-count artificially inflated by the Electoral College system? Everything else is "Majority Rules", why not Presidential elections? States-rights are protected by each State having 2 Senators regardless of population.
Click to expand...

The electoral college was created to make sure elite did not lose control of the presidency to some populist demi-god. Keep in mind the EC delegates are not legally bound to vote for the candidate they are listed under. They can vote for anyone they wish.
rahu
 
CapAquaPis

CapAquaPis

Well-known member
The electoral college will vote on Dec 19, they may consider Hillary Clinton's 400,000 popular vote lead, despite Donald Trump won by 289 electoral votes-19 ahead of the 270 finish line. Hillary Clinton has 48.5%, while Donald Trump 48.1%, so this is another "tied" election and 2nd place ends up the winner.
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
CapAquaPis said:

The electoral college will vote on Dec 19,
they may consider Hillary Clinton's 400,000 popular vote lead,
despite Donald Trump won by 289 electoral votes-19 ahead of the 270 finish line.
Hillary Clinton has 48.5%, while Donald Trump 48.1%,
so this is another "tied" election and 2nd place ends up the winner.
Click to expand...

Here's map ptv posted showing the outcome of this presidential election of 2016
county by county in the United States.
The blue regions are those counties in which Ms Clinton won by popular vote.
As you can easily see that didn't amount to very much
in terms of regional territory. . :smile:



those small patches of blue in a overwhelming sea of red

 
D

david starling

Well-known member
JUPITERASC said:
Here's map ptv posted showing the outcome of this presidential election of 2016
county by county in the United States.
The blue regions are those counties in which Ms Clinton won by popular vote.
As you can easily see that didn't amount to very much
in terms of regional territory. . :smile:



those small patches of blue in a overwhelming sea of red
Click to expand...

It's not about regional territory, it's about population. EVERY State, regardless of population, gets an automatic 2 Electoral votes. THEN comes the voting, where even the slightest popular majority gives ALL the population-assigned Electoral-votes to one candidate. Trump would have lost THIS election on Popular-vote count alone. BUT WAIT....If it HAD BEEN a Popular-vote election WITHOUT an Electoral College, Trump wouldn't have neglected the sure-win-for-HRC-Electoral States, and very well COULD have garnered enough Popular votes to win the Election. So, the FACT that Trump LOST the (didn't-matter) Popular-vote in THIS election, doesn't mean his STRATEGY wouldn't have changed accordingly for a Popular-vote-ONLY election. :cool: So, no Electoral College would mean that EVERY vote would count equally, and the candidates would have to woo EVERY potential voter, regardless of what State they live in. So, being pro Popular-vote only, DOESN'T equate with being pro-HRC or anti-Trump, unless one (unfairly) attempts to apply her Popular-vote victory to THIS election, where Electoral-votes were all that mattered for President.
 
Last edited:
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
david starling said:
It's not about regional territory, it's about population.
EVERY State, regardless of population, gets an automatic 2 Electoral votes.
THEN comes the voting, where even the slightest popular majority gives ALL the population-assigned Electoral-votes to one candidate.
Trump would have lost THIS election on Popular-vote count alone.
BUT WAIT....If it HAD BEEN a Popular-vote election WITHOUT an Electoral College,
Trump wouldn't have neglected the sure-win-for-HRC-Electoral States,
and very well COULD have garnered enough Popular votes to win the Election.
So, the FACT that Trump LOST the (didn't-matter) Popular-vote in THIS election,
doesn't mean his STRATEGY wouldn't have changed accordingly for a Popular-vote-ONLY election. :cool:
So, no Electoral College would mean that EVERY vote would count equally,
and the candidates would have to woo EVERY potential voter, regardless of what State they live in.
So, being pro Popular-vote only, DOESN'T equate with being pro-HRC or anti-Trump,
unless one (unfairly) attempts to apply her Popular-vote victory to THIS election,
where Electoral-votes were all that mattered for President.
Click to expand...
Certainly EVERY POPULAR VOTE COUNTING EQUALLY MAKES SENSE :smile:

BUT
that's NOT how the DEMOCRATIC PARTY 2016 CANDIDATE got the opportunity to run for the presidency

HILLARY IS OK WITH SUPERDELEGATES
but not ok with an ELECTROCAL COLLEGE




Cfyla_QWcAE66Yi.jpg
 
R

rahu

Banned
david starling said:
It's not about regional territory, it's about population. EVERY State, regardless of population, gets an automatic 2 Electoral votes. THEN comes the voting, where even the slightest popular majority gives ALL the population-assigned Electoral-votes to one candidate. Trump would have lost THIS election on Popular-vote count alone. BUT WAIT....If it HAD BEEN a Popular-vote election WITHOUT an Electoral College, Trump wouldn't have neglected the sure-win-for-HRC-Electoral States, and very well COULD have garnered enough Popular votes to win the Election. So, the FACT that Trump LOST the (didn't-matter) Popular-vote in THIS election, doesn't mean his STRATEGY wouldn't have changed accordingly for a Popular-vote-ONLY election. :cool: So, no Electoral College would mean that EVERY vote would count equally, and the candidates would have to woo EVERY potential voter, regardless of what State they live in. So, being pro Popular-vote only, DOESN'T equate with being pro-HRC or anti-Trump, unless one (unfairly) attempts to apply her Popular-vote victory to THIS election, where Electoral-votes were all that mattered for President.
Click to expand...

THEN comes the voting, where even the slightest popular majority gives ALL the population-assigned Electoral-votes to one candidate.

it depends on that state some give all electoral votes to the majority others give a proportion to both depending on their percentage.

once again the electoral college has nothing to do with fairness, it has to do with the elite controlling the presidency.

and again the EC does not have to vote for the person who they are listed under.
the can vote for anybody, even someone not on the ballot.

rahu
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
JUPITERASC said:
Certainly EVERY POPULAR VOTE COUNTING EQUALLY MAKES SENSE :smile:

BUT
that's NOT how the DEMOCRATIC PARTY 2016 CANDIDATE got the opportunity to run for the presidency

HILLARY IS OK WITH SUPERDELEGATES
but not ok with an ELECTROCAL COLLEGE




Cfyla_QWcAE66Yi.jpg
Click to expand...

I'm in favor of no Superdelegates as well as no Electoral College. Popular-vote ONLY!
 
D

deanna

Well-known member
"JUPITERASC: You can read an astrological not all boards are solely astrological obviousely"

Do you not realize you are on a astrology forum?
Please read the administrators responses and keep all non-astrology conversation in chat - OR just go to a political blog.
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
deanna said:
"JUPITERASC: You can read an astrological not all boards are solely astrological obviousely"

Do you not realize you are on a astrology forum?
Please read the administrators responses and keep all non-astrology conversation in chat - OR just go to a political blog.
Click to expand...

Deanna, you're right on this one. Nothing spiritual about politics. :annoyed:
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
deanna said:
"JUPITERASC: You can read an astrological not all boards are solely astrological obviousely"

Do you not realize you are on a astrology forum?
Please read the administrators responses and keep all non-astrology conversation in chat - OR just go to a political blog.
Click to expand...
Trump is a political leader - this thread discusses Trump as Spiritual Leader in Disguise :smile:
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
david starling said:

Deanna, you're right on this one. Nothing spiritual about politics. :annoyed:
Click to expand...
Working with the Trump Nightmare :smile:
On center stage of your nightmare stands the character of Donald Trump.
If you take him at a literal level you may see him as a villain bringing out the worst
But dreams don’t operate at the literal level.
They demand we approach them at the symbolic and metaphorical level
and pretty much always turn the tables
on what we assume to be true.
So if this were my dream
(and of course it is)
rather than a villain
Donald Trump would be playing the role of a gifted spiritual teacher.
I’ll explain what I mean by that. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...acher-in-disguise_us_578912e2e4b0e7c8734fe16d
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
Trump is a Sorcerer, who lives a tower, from which he will rule the populace, which he considers inferior and controllable. Some have responded to his spells by becoming ensorcelled, and are now his sneering, derisive minions; others have reacted with fear and loathing, and are shocked or angered. His reign as POTUS is best understood on the Occult, not the Mundane, level. :alien:
 
Last edited:
Sweet Pea

Sweet Pea

Well-known member
Don't they say that everyone in your dream represents a part of you?

Both Trump and Clinton represent archetypes out of the collective psyche. Which archetype "steps forth" as main protagonist in your dream depends on the bigger astrological picture.

When people recognise aspects of Trump and Clinton within themselves, and start to clean up their own act, then the collective psyche can improve. The swamp isn't just in Washington, it's part of all of us, our shadow, the aspects of self that we don't want to acknowledge.

As an example of the correspondence between Trump and the people, here's what Michael Moore said in an article in the Times at the weekend -

"What his friends saw as negative for Mr Trump were all positives in Mr Moore's home state. 'There, every April when you do your taxes, it's almost a requirement to try to pay as little as possible to Washington. They looked at Trump and thought, 'this guy is smart, he's playing the system, we want to be like him'."

A lot of men hold derogatory attitudes towards women and the rich and famous will be as predatory as women let them be (to suit themselves, of course).

When the people have upped their game, consciousness-wise, then perhaps we shall see more spiritually-minded people stepping out on the world stage.

Trump could certainly be seen as the Trickster/Magician archetype, with his Uranus-Sun conjunction in Gemini.

In January, his Uranus will be challenged by transiting Pluto in Capricorn and the year after it will be nudging his Sun. I suspect his freedom to conjure up exactly what he likes as POTUS will be severely curtailed.
 
Oddity

Oddity

Well-known member
All of us, if we are of reflective habit, like and admire men whose fundamental beliefs differ radically from our own. But when a candidate for public office faces the voters he does not face men of sense; he faces a mob of men whose chief distinguishing mark is the fact that they are quite incapable of weighing ideas, or even of comprehending any save the most elemental — men whose whole thinking is done in terms of emotion, and whose dominant emotion is dread of what they cannot understand. So confronted, the candidate must either bark with the pack or count himself lost. … All the odds are on the man who is, intrinsically, the most devious and mediocre — the man who can most adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum.

The Presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.

 -H.L. Mencken, Baltimore Sun (26 July 1920)
Click to expand...

Seemed apropos.
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
I Like Ike! :happy: Stephenson lost the Election to Eisenhower. The generally agreed-upon reason among pundits--Adlai was perceived as being "too intelligent"!
 
Last edited:
D

david starling

Well-known member
JUPITERASC said:
clearly not spiritual then :smile:
Click to expand...

Carter used to pray in the Rose Garden at the White House. Highly intelligent, but known as a plain old "peanut-farmer"! Kennedy was the last President who flaunted his intelligence. Btw, the words "Under God" we're added to the Pledge of Allegiance during the Eisenhower Administration.
If Trump IS a spiritual leader, he could be considered the High Priest of Pluto, Greek God of wealth.
 
Last edited:
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
david starling said:
Carter used to pray in the Rose Garden at the White House. Highly intelligent, but known as a plain old "peanut-farmer"! Kennedy was the last President who flaunted his intelligence. Btw, the words "Under God" we're added to the Pledge of Allegiance during the Eisenhower Administration.
If Trump IS a spiritual leader,
he could be considered the High Priest of Pluto, Greek God of wealth.
Click to expand...




f7b1cb060a869a6a2fd4352cdb97ed60.jpg


ny-post-clinton-cover-640x716.jpg
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Eric Shawn reports on the debate over the Founding Fathers' creation

Professor makes case for the Electoral College :smile:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIPt0oZuYFU
 
Top