Not a single thread on the US election?

[Ttaskmaster]

So the Republican Elephant is led by a guy called Trump.... trumpetty trump...

Is it possible for Obama to become PM of the UK, or anything?
He seems like the sort of dude we could do with... and he appears to be between jobs right now.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

So the Republican Elephant is led by a guy called Trump.... trumpetty trump...

Is it possible for Obama to become PM of the UK, or anything?
He seems like the sort of dude we could do with... and he appears to be between jobs right now.

Its interesting the direction Canada has gone towards the liberal party and Justin Trudeau,whilst we and the US are moving more and more to the right. OTH,it makes me also wonder whether Corbyn who has been demonised by every media source available,might actually do better than expected(he does not need to win,but just do enough to push things more towards the centre IMHO).

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Interesting - technically the total votes for Clinton was 0.1% more??!! Wow.

[wazzickle]

Interesting - technically the total votes for Clinton was 0.1% more??!! Wow.

Gerrymandering / vote rigging / 'democracy at work' etc

[kalniel]

Interesting - technically the total votes for Clinton was 0.1% more??!! Wow.

Completely normal. Look at pretty much any general election in the UK for worse examples than this.

For example, 2015. Lib Dems got 2,415,862 votes, SNP got 1,454,436. Lib Dems should have almost twice as many seats right? Wrong, SNP have 56 to Lib Dems 8!

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Gerrymandering / vote rigging / 'democracy at work' etc

I think its more the fact they use a FPTP principle.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7407826.html

On the morning after election night, Ms Clinton had collected 59.4 million votes, giving her a 47.7 per cent share, while Mr Trump had 59.2 million votes and a 47.5 per cent share. That was with around 92 per cent of the vote counted, with many of the remaining votes to be totted up from pro-Clinton states like Colorado.

So,technically speaking Clinton apparently had some decent support.

It might explain why Trump was slightly conciliary against after he knew he had won.

Imagine if they had somebody like Saunders instead??

Completely normal. Look at pretty much any general election in the UK for worse examples than this.

For example, 2015. Lib Dems got 2,415,862 votes, SNP got 1,454,436. Lib Dems should have almost twice as many seats right? Wrong, SNP have 56 to Lib Dems 8!

Well here were had a vote to change the system but nobody could be bothered to vote to change the system!! Democracy!!

Edit!!

Is it me or does 120 million people seem like less than 40% of the population voted? ?

[Ttaskmaster]

Gerrymandering / vote rigging / 'democracy at work' etc

Whaaaaaaaat?
Noooooooooo, neverrrrrrrrrrrrrr........

Didn't George-Dubbyah's election have a state that kept doing recounts until it resulted in him winning, or something?

[directhex]

I'm guessing Germany is next,

France next.

They've got a presidential election between a hard-right reincarnation, and actual fascist.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

France next.

They've got a presidential election between a hard-right reincarnation, and actual fascist.

Time to hedge your bets on Ladbrokes then!!

[Galant]

Vote 'discrepancy' is due to the electoral college system the USA has. The basic idea is that because the different states are the component members of the nation and because they can have a lot of independence and have certain rights to govern themselves in and of themselves, the electoral college exists to balance out the voting power so that even states with lesser populations have a voice. Without it, the argument goes, two or three states might well decide elections because of their massive populations. So it's more about the states voting, rather than the individuals, if that makes sense (because the states sort of have their own identities and they want to respect that).

[opel80uk]

Please understand, I'm not dismissing Trump's words as irrelevant or acceptable. You're right, that sort of attitude is reprehensible. However, for a great many people words spoken casually, in private, in the past, like that, don't weigh heavily enough against the sort of on-the-record lies and irresponsibility shown by Hillary.

These facts about both candidates are why a number of my friends in the USA voted for third parties/independents. Others chose to vote Trump because, despite his failings, they believed Hillary guilty of far worse and with the potential for far worse. That might have been my reasoning to, had I had vote. Maybe not, I don't know. But that was my point. If you don't mind me asking, what might have been your rationale had you had to vote and make that decision?

My point, and I suppose rationale if I had a vote, would've have been that a man that espoused the view, privately or otherwise, that it's ok to grab women by the genitals in the context he was describing, and even if I agreed 100% with everything else he had said, would never, ever get my vote. So I would then have to look at who was left, in this case Clinton, and decide whether she had crossed any red lines for me with regards to her suitability to the Office. Her handling of the emails fiasco was nothing short of ridiculous and I think I'd have found it very hard to vote for her either for the simple reason that I'm not sure that a seasoned politician who plays that fast and loose with items of national security is suitable. That said, if it meant keeping a man like Trump out of Office, and my only practical way of doing that was to vote for her, I would have.

You are right that Trumps words evidently didn't weigh that heavily enough for some people, and that fact disappoints me. But I am content in knowing that I wouldn't have been one of them.

[wazzickle]

See, the thing about these campaigns is that a lot of it was simply fabricated on both sides, without any repercussions for getting found out to be FOS - the rumours stuck. You can't really trust much of what's been said, other than what has literally come out of their mouths, by which metric, Trump is a gigantic cockwomble who shouldn't be let anywhere near children, let alone the presidency.

[Corky34]

Not necessarily. These are words spoken in private in a boastful manner. It's not the same as admitting to sexual assault. If he were definitely guilty of sexual assault that would have removed him as an option for me if I were voting. However, I don't believe that has been demonstrated and I'm careful with stories arising during political campaigns because they are known for throwing out as much crap as possible and hoping something sticks.

So i take it you've not listen to that tape then.

That they were spoken in private is probably more damning than if he said them publicly as that shows his true self, the person he is when not trying to protect his public image, I'm also not sure who it says more about that what he said is seen by some as being said in a boastful manner, my ethics and moral tell me that boasting about grabbing a women's gentiles is not something to be proud of, far from it in fact.

I don't see that he's shown himself as xenophobic

So building a wall and banning all Muslim isn't xenophobic, shouting about other countries taking your jerbs isn't?

I don't believe he's racist.

Neither do i and i didn't say he was, using that term in reference to Trump devalues it's true meaning as he dislike anyone not born in America.

He's been painted that way. I think, most likely, he's a guy who talks and brags too much and tries to make himself look like the boss. I don't think he's principled in good or bad ways.

Having someone who talks and brags too much and tries to make himself look like the boss probably isn't the sort of person you want in charge of one of the most powerful nations on earth really, is it?

Scant regard for the rule of law? Do you have something in mind here? I haven't seen that, apart from him trying to play loopholes with tax etc. Was there something else? How do you see Hillary in this light, because it seems clear to me that she has shown MASSIVE disregard for the rule of law. If this is important for you then were you okay with Hillary in this matter?

Well there's this Wiki article referencing the Legal affairs of Donald Trump to be getting on with, and no I'm not going to double check each of the 3,500 legal cases he's been involved in.

And no I'm not OK with Hillary in this matter, like i said she's not exactly white as the driven snow or perfection personified, like most politicians she's rumored to be as bent as a nine bob note, sadly the expression: Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely, has always, and will probably always be true.

Awful grasp of finances? Possible, however Hillary hasn't shown herself brilliant, and she hasn't got a business record to compare with Trumps. For me this is a lesser issue when faced with two undesirable candidates. I think the greater landscape of American government, the three branches, the team the successful candidate surrounded themselves with, has to factor in here.

Well no, she hasn't been bankrupt 6 times and (afaik) she's not got a long list of people who say she refused to pay them for work done.
Trump has been described as a Mediocre Businessman and it's only the bluster you referred to earlier that convinced people otherwise, IIRC American banks actually consider him such a risk they refused him credit so he had to go cap in hand to a Russian bank.

[directhex]

Neither do i and i didn't say he was, using that term in reference to Trump devalues it's true meaning as he dislike anyone not born in America.

Sorry, but Trump is definitely a shameless racist. It's how he started his career. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/us...sing-race.html

And continued his career.

Instantly, Donald was enthused. “Yeah, I never liked the guy. I don’t think he knows what the f––– he’s doing. My accountants up in New York are always complaining about him. He’s not responsive. And isn’t it funny, I’ve got black accountants at the Trump Castle and at Trump Plaza. Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day. Those are the kind of people I want counting my money. No one else.”

I couldn’t believe I was hearing this. But Donald went on, “Besides that, I’ve got to tell you something else. I think that the guy is lazy. And it’s probably not his fault because laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is, I believe that. It’s not something they can control. … Don’t you agree?”

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

It always boggles my mind how a nation of immigrants and their descendants barely a few 100 years old can be racist to other immigrants and their descendants,especially when the Native Americans are the original inhabitants of the country.

[OilSheikh]

Not a single thread on the US election?

Politics are best not discussed on hexus. Even the blatantly obvious facts are ignored.