Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I suspect the Founders would find HRC as unpleasant as I do ... which is considerably. However, your indictments fall seriously short of your conclusion that Chump would be the Founders' choice.
You condemn HRC on three points:
1. Corrupt
2. Career politician
3. Power hungry personality
Let's dispense with #'s 2 and 3 easily first:
#2. However much you (and I) might find career politicians distasteful people frequently, being a career politician is not a disqualifyer in the slightest. In fact, a career politician is far more likely to be skillful and efficient in evaluating and creating policy, and in understanding and executing the nuances of policies of every kind in governance - than a non-politician. Career political experience also provides the most opportunity for operating within the protocols and laws of governance.
#3. However much power hungry personalities legitimately raise a warning flag, how these personalities actually govern is the test. And in our Founders' wisdom, there are three branches of governing power ... each a check and balance against the others.
So your protest fails entirely on both these counts - regardless of to whom you apply the labels. And, in the case of HRC, for all she is a disfavorable personality, she is also a proven skillful politician and statesman. She is smart as a whip. Deeply experienced. Deeply connected. Highly educated in general and specifically in law and governance. She is consumately qualified to be president. You, and I, just don't like her personaliy, her platform ideologies, her disingenuousness ... and similar. None of that makes her incompetent to govern.
Now, as to #1 ... prove your accusation of corruption. Don't regurgitate accusations. Show us proof of her corruption.
So no, the EC did NOT function as intended. It allowed partisan electors to put an entirely inexperienced, cleary 100% incompetent, deranged moron in the White House. Virtually every member of the house and senate, as well as his entire cabinet, know he is incompetent. He is referred to as a moron by numerous of his own party and advisers. He is precisely the definition of who the Founders created the EC to protect against.
The fact is Hillary and Donald both knew how the EC works. Hillary was so arrogant she thought it was her turn and ignored what others (like Bill) were telling her. Donald saw the opportunity that the EC provides and used it to his advantage. That's the way the world works, and is the reason Donald Trump is now the President. And the EC functioned EXACTLY as intended. You just don't like the outcome.
Another fact for you, Hillary's only qualification for any job she ever had was that she was Bill's wife. "skillful politician"? lol
Peace and love
Hoot
Last edited by Buckeye77; 02-01-2018 at 05:45 AM..
The fact is Hillary and Donald both knew how the EC works. Hillary was so arrogant she thought it was her turn and ignored what others (like Bill) were telling her. Donald saw the opportunity that the EC provides and used it to his advantage. That's the way the world works, and is the reason Donald Trump is now the President. And the EC functioned EXACTLY as intended. You just don't like the outcome.
Another fact for you, Hillary's only qualification for any job she ever had was that she was Bill's wife. "skillful politician"? lol
Peace and love
Hoot
You are correct that HRC knew/knows how the EC works ... and that she arrogantly assumed it was her turn to be annointed, and thus ignored any responsibility to the party she represents, and to the people of the US - who, in the end, are the entity intended to be served. I haven't the slightest admiration for HRC.
However, the Donald didn't see squat. But likely a number of his support team did. The Donald, himself, is a moron. A sad variety of very capable people associate themselves with him to use his wealth and notoriety/popularity.
And all one needs to do to understand that the EC just failed is become educated in its conceived intent, how it was structured, and how it has been used as a partisan tool in contradiction to its intended purpose. I provided some quotes from Founder Hamilton, for example, to get you started. Have at it. The EC is a farce.
That said also, right: I certainly do not like the outcome. I didn't last time the EC tipped an election either. I don't like it because it is a charade and a lie.
HRC is - however distatseful I find her - exactly as I described: smart as a whip, very well experienced and accomplished as a politician and statesperson, and deeply capable of conducting the affairs of the nation in the tradition we have been following.
The real problem with the way HRC would have conducted the business of the nation is that the evolution of all our politics is sick as hell. And she's part of it.
But for those who voted for, and especially those who continue to support the Donald, and wanted our dysfunctional political reality to change - much as I appreciate your disdain for the status quo - you weren't very thoughtful about the fool you picked. He is not only an incompetent, amoral, mentally disordered moron, but also a tool of many of the very people you hate.
I guess you just enjoy being wrong - The EC was created primarily to protect the rights/interests of the small states. Like much of what our founding fathers did, not everyone agreed with everything, but what was created was the sum of their collective wisdom, which I suspect outweighs your biased point of view
Hillary "accomplished as a politician" - SHE LOST TO TRUMP. When this race started, a ham sandwich could have beat Trump, Hillary didn't. And, she has been riding on Bill's coattails her entire life. Face it - she ain't all that and a bag of chips.
Trump "incompetent, amoral , mentally disordered moron" - this statement says more about you than it does about President Trump. He outfoxed you and the DNC and the RNC. He's in the White House, Hillary isn't - that's a fact. The real amoral, incompetent moron is the one who lost, not the one who won.
Hope you enjoy the next 3 or 7 years as much as I will!
I guess you just enjoy being wrong - The EC was created primarily to protect the rights/interests of the small states. Like much of what our founding fathers did, not everyone agreed with everything, but what was created was the sum of their collective wisdom, which I suspect outweighs your biased point of view
Hillary "accomplished as a politician" - SHE LOST TO TRUMP. When this race started, a ham sandwich could have beat Trump, Hillary didn't. And, she has been riding on Bill's coattails her entire life. Face it - she ain't all that and a bag of chips.
Trump "incompetent, amoral , mentally disordered moron" - this statement says more about you than it does about President Trump. He outfoxed you and the DNC and the RNC. He's in the White House, Hillary isn't - that's a fact. The real amoral, incompetent moron is the one who lost, not the one who won.
Hope you enjoy the next 3 or 7 years as much as I will!
I'm not wrong. The EC was created with two purposes. Your little version states the (simplified) secondary purpose. The primary was to keep the election of the POTUS out of the hands of the people. It's written clearly in every historical record, and the Hamilton quote I provided is quite clear. The Founders feared an uninformed, unsophisticated electorate could be swayed by demagogues “of low intrigue”, etc. here are the quotes again for your review:
Quote:
It is “desirable,” Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 68, “that the sense of the people should operate in the choice of” president. But is “equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station.” These “men”—the electors––would be “most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.” And because of their discernment—because they possessed wisdom that the people as a whole might not—“the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.”
As Michael Signer explains, the framers were particularly afraid of the people choosing a demagogue. The electors, Hamilton believed, would prevent someone with “talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity” from becoming president. And they would combat “the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.” They would prevent America’s adversaries from meddling in its elections. The founders created the Electoral College, in other words, in part to prevent the election of someone like Donald Trump.
The concern for balancing the election with regard to rural / urban interests was a secondary consideration ...
The “sum of [the Founders'] collective wisdom is precisely the view I represent ... except their mechanism has been hijacked by partisan manipulation ... specifically delivering what they intended to guard against. The reason of their failure is that they assumed future trustees would be of the same high character as they were, and would thus always insure a competent choice rather than allow partisanship to hold sway.
As to HRC, you seem to be of the opinion that I think highly of her even though I have made clear I detest her. Whatever. In any case, Chump didn't beat her. She beat herself with the help of the equally polluted DNC. But she is, as I stated, very intelligent. An example of how easily intelligence doesn't guarantee against blind mistakes.
Politician? She certainly is. She's been elected to office. Served the duties of Sec State extremely competently (which is not to say I agree with he policies she negotiated and represented). Look up the definition of politician:
Quote:
Definition of politician - a person who is professionally involved in politics, especially as a holder of an elected office.
Outfoxed me? Chump? Nobody outfoxed me. I wasn't involved in any fox hunting. And Donald is sitting where he is because some very clever data analytics people got him there ... he didn't have a damn thing to do with any of it. He doesn't even know how he got there he's so stupid.
Look up Michael Kosinski, Cambridge Analytics, the Mercer family, and Avinash Iragavarapu. Then get back to me and I'll feed you more if you are interested. While you are reading up on them, take some tangential trips into how Russian analytics leveraged similar data mining based (probably) on Kosinski's brilliant algorithms for how to define Facebook members' personalities ... and, critically, which rural districts to super target with AI bots. This is not so simplistic as you and 99.99% of Trumpeteers believe.
Enjoyment? Moi? What makes you think I'm incapable of enjoying watching the Emperor With No Clothes make a foolish spectacle of himself? I didn't want HRC in the Blight House. As disgusting as this catastrophe has become, it's also immensely amusing to someone like me. I have no allegiance to or love of the political charades America conducts.
If smart establishment types and conservative citizens knew their ass from their elbows they had a great, intelligent and ethically sound candidate in Kasich. Even though I don't like his platform, I'd have likely voted for him over HRC, myself ... just to support a more dignified figurehead. HRC was so unpalatable to the public, Kasich would have kicked her ass.
If the DNC hadn't had its head up its own rear, and they'd been willing to support real revolution against our sick establishment politics, they had Bernie ... who could have beaten the bejesus out of the Donald.
I'll give you credit - you are consistent. Consistently wrong, but consistent. Donald won. EC worked as intended (the demi-god was Hillary, not Donald). And I can guaran-f'ing-tee that President Trump is a whole lot smarter than you give him credit for, and demonstratively smarter than Hillary. Hillary's only, ONLY, qualification is that she married Bill. She was a do nothing senator, and used her SOS status to enrich herself.
And your definition of a politician would include President Trump, wouldn't it! You described Hillary as a "skillful politician" and later as a "accomplished as a politician" - how many times to you need to be reminded that she LOST. She is at best a third rate political hack.
Yes, you were clearly out foxed. And the more you post the more apparent that is, since you still can't see it.
p.s. I'm done with this - you can have the last word to regurgitate your bitterness.
I'll give you credit - you are consistent. Consistently wrong, but consistent. Donald won. EC worked as intended (the demi-god was Hillary, not Donald). And I can guaran-f'ing-tee that President Trump is a whole lot smarter than you give him credit for, and demonstratively smarter than Hillary. Hillary's only, ONLY, qualification is that she married Bill. She was a do nothing senator, and used her SOS status to enrich herself.
And your definition of a politician would include President Trump, wouldn't it! You described Hillary as a "skillful politician" and later as a "accomplished as a politician" - how many times to you need to be reminded that she LOST. She is at best a third rate political hack.
Yes, you were clearly out foxed. And the more you post the more apparent that is, since you still can't see it.
p.s. I'm done with this - you can have the last word to regurgitate your bitterness.
“Last word?” Hmmm. So many choices ...
How about: “There are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know.”
“Bitterness?” Laughing at morons and fools ...
And yes, Chump is a politician by definition ... now. But he wasn't when he ran. He's never been anything but a self-absorbed narcissistic sociopathic liar who's only claim to glory has been from leveraging the wealth handed to him through familial entitlement ... which money and obnoxiously offensive behaviors have attracted a certain community of bottom-feeders to rally around him for their own self aggrandizement.
How's that for a closing statement?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
