longwayhome
Posts: 1035
Joined: 1/9/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Greta75
quote:
ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire
Hillary someone trounced him by 3 million votes.
Dude, it's an electoral vote system. Not a popular vote system.
Do you think Trump winning is a Fluke?
If Trump wanted to win this election by popular vote strategy, he would have stayed a Democrat, but popular vote don't win you American Election. He always been a Democrat and on top of that, he could easily glide on the pro-LGBT, pro-choice, single payer healthcare platform. Which are things he genuinely believe in until he has to win as a Republican.
That's why he switch to Republican and strategise as a Republican, on what are the important states he needs to win and focus on those. Because it was only Electoral Votes that counted.
Hillary was just like over-confident about her 'sure-win' states and didn't put any effort and lost. Her strategy sucked. And she was too scared to show her face majority of the time, hiding in silence majority of her election period, afraid to say something wrong and have the media twist it. But Trump just go head on all the time, showing he has nothing to hide and not afraid of challenges.
Come to think of it, do you know your UK system is pretty much electoral vote too? Choosing your PM isn't a popular vote thingy either. You don't even get to vote for your PM.
WTF Greta.
Just what exactly has this to do with the UK? You are becoming obsessed.
And how can one women be so badly informed about so many issues?
The British PM is not elected (as is the case in most European countries). The PM is generally the leader of the largest party in the Commons and has to command a majority to govern. It's called Parliamentary democracy. You elect local representatives, not the PM. It's a very common form of democracy, especially in Europe. It has its issues in that it's very good for local representation but can be harsh on minority parties who gain small amounts of votes in every constituency but cannot achieve proportional representation in Parliament, e.g. the Greens and UKIP.
If you want to make a point about proportional representation and its potential role in reducing the democratic deficit, please do that, but for fuck sake please at least try to find something out about it before you do.
The US system of checks and balances with the system to produce a mixture of local accountability and state representation is quite different.
Trump lost the popular vote, meaning he does not represent the majority of Americans. He did however win the Presidential election because it is essentially a state by state vote rather than a straight first past the post popular vote. The GOP also triumphed in Congress in theory cementing Republican power alongside a Republican President. Sadly Trump has trouble commanding all the Republican votes in Congress because he cannot take the majority of like minded people with him.
Winning the Presidential election is not the only requirement for governing in the US. The press you hate so much would not be able to affect Trump's ability to govern if it wasn't for the lack of universal Republican support for the President. It is evident that many people voted Republican for Senate and House of Representatives but didn't vote for Trump as President, as many Republican members of Congress are aware. Many of the current problems in governing therefore come directly from the will of the people and how Republican voters voted and not the "left-wing" press or the Democrats.
It's not really that complicated.
Trump and his family are very close to the Russians. Whether Americans as a whole view this as a problem remains to be seen. It's never good to seen as having close links to another country as an individual politician or as a political party. Formal government led foreign relations are a different thing but that all seems to have been blurred during the election. Frankly that is the issue, not whether the Russians tried to disrupt or influence the Presidential elections. Sure they did as they have been doing in other parts of the world - no big surprise. But the Russians did not determine the results of the election - the American people did.
The real question is how far the Trumps were in bed with the Russians prior to or during the elections, how open they have been and whether that is acceptable to most Americans. For all the heated debate in the media and on the web, we will need another Presidential election to really get the answer to that.
|
RE: Trump son met Russian who promised material on Clinton - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread