Hillary Clinton Latest Crime

wan said:

I see. Apologies then, I pre-judged you.

That being said, I remember reading an online article once, it said that the electoral vote was implemented so as to prevent places with high populations (say, New York or Los Angeles) from completely dominating the election. It said the electoral vote would give a voice to states with low population densities.

Click to expand...

NEVERTHELESS

Oddity said:

I wouldn't describe the EC as tyrannical. You live in a federal republic, and neither the Declaration of Independence, nor the Constitution calls it a democracy. The EC helps to ensure that each state gets a say in who's elected to the presidency.

Nonetheless, you have quite a bit of democracy in your voting system. And you have a legally elected president. Short of dismantling or changing the EC (unlikely to happen because it is a federal republic)

there's not a lot you can do.
You can petition for most states to go the way Maine does with the EC,
with proportional representation,
but that's about it.

Click to expand...

david starling said:

I'm adamantly opposed
to any immigrants behaving as though our laws and mores don't apply to them.
But, it's a delicate matter, requiring skillful handling. Trump's sledgehammer approach is exactly what we don't need.

Click to expand...

wan said:

I see. Apologies then, I pre-judged you.

That being said, I remember reading an online article once, it said that the electoral vote was implemented so as to prevent places with high populations (say, New York or Los Angeles) from completely dominating the election. It said the electoral vote gave a voice to states with low population densities.

Click to expand...

See what you think of this--let's say your State's Popular-vote is highest for the candidate you voted against, but only by a few percentage points. It's "winner-take-all", so you and millions of others in your State couldn't contribute a single Electoral-vote to the candidate of your choice--ALL the Electoral-votes went to the other candidate, so your vote was thrown away, when it comes to who became the leader of the country.
Also, States have their own Congressional and Senatorial representatives, and these ARE elected by Popular-vote. And in this case, your votes do count, because they were given to the candidates you voted for. And these representatives "give a voice" to each State, including those with low population densities, based on the principle of One Person, One Vote. The President needs support from both Congress and the Senate, and low density States have influence in that regard.
Glad to hear your opinion!

blacksun? said:

The problem is that every single thing a private person receives from insurance companies is retrieved at least two fold from the governments treasury. Thats how the scheme of government controlled health insurance works everywhere.

The only thing that ever works is government provided healthcare, without the intermediary of profit-oriented insurance companies. If there is no money involved, it works.

In general I am in favour of abolishing all tax and premiums for privates, and installing a 20 or perhaps 30 percent flat capital gains tax on 100 million plus companies, with no loopholes - in this way I think most of the economy can be financed and people can have lives.

Click to expand...

Cutting out the Healthcare Insurance Industry seems politically impossible. How could that be accomplished? Is that something Trump is likely to attempt?

Dubyadude1986 said:

Currently awaiting denial and excuses.

"The Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee helped fund research that resulted in a now-famous dossier containing allegations about President Trump’s connections to Russia and possible coordination between his campaign and the Kremlin, people familiar with the matter said.

Marc E. Elias, a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC, retained Fusion GPS, a Washington firm, to conduct the research.

After that, Fusion GPS hired dossier author Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer with ties to the FBI and the U.S. intelligence community, according to those people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...3470754bbb9_story.html?utm_term=.5a90aea45963

Click to expand...

IT's so true though. Donna Brazile says she has proof Hillary rigged DNC primary.

Hillary's Latest Crime!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...nc-rigged-nomination-for-hillary-clinton.html

JUPITERASC said:

Click to expand...

Even the fact she was elected Popular-vote President hasn't stuck.

david starling said:

Even the fact she was elected Popular-vote President hasn't stuck.

Click to expand...

as Oddity commented

Oddity said:

I wouldn't describe the EC as tyrannical. You live in a federal republic, and neither the Declaration of Independence, nor the Constitution calls it a democracy. The EC helps to ensure that each state gets a say in who's elected to the presidency.

Nonetheless, you have quite a bit of democracy in your voting system. And you have a legally elected president.
Short of dismantling or changing the EC (unlikely to happen because it is a federal republic) there's not a lot you can do. You can petition for most states to go the way Maine does with the EC, with proportional representation, but that's about it.

Click to expand...

JUPITERASC said:

as Oddity commented

Click to expand...

The Electoral College, winner-take-all system, is the last vestige of a Confederacy, whereby each State elects its own President. Hillary is President of California by Popular-vote, Trump is President of Texas, for example. So much for "a more perfect Union", and, "National Tranquility". "Unlikely to change" doesn't make it right.

david starling said:

The Electoral College, winner-take-all system, is the last vestige of a Confederacy, whereby each State elects its own President. Hillary is President of California by Popular-vote, Trump is President of Texas, for example. So much for "a more perfect Union", and, "National Tranquility". "Unlikely to change" doesn't make it right.

Click to expand...

Oddity said:

I wouldn't describe the EC as tyrannical. You live in a federal republic, and neither the Declaration of Independence, nor the Constitution calls it a democracy. The EC helps to ensure that each state gets a say in who's elected to the presidency.

Nonetheless, you have quite a bit of democracy in your voting system. And you have a legally elected president. Short of dismantling or changing the EC (unlikely to happen because it is a federal republic)

there's not a lot you can do.
You can petition for most states to go the way Maine does with the EC,
with proportional representation,
but that's about it.

Click to expand...

Hillary was nearly replaced by Joe Biden

Donna Brazile considered replacing Hillary with Joe Biden.

An astrologer commented about Chelsea's chart showing her mother's fall from grace. Can anyone validate that assessment?

AG Jeff Sessions just announced the DoJ will be re-opening the Uranium One and Clinton Foundation investigation as a result of twenty Congressmen requesting it.