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.
The term "mandate" is one of the most misused terms there is. By definition it is "the authority to carry out a policy or course of action".
Just by winning the election, Trump now has the authority to implement his plan and it doesn't matter what Hillary, or the liberals, or anyone else thinks.
Deliberately misleading.
The much more appropriate definition in this context is...
"the authority to carry out a policy or course of action, regarded as given by the electorate to a candidate or party that is victorious in an election."
That would suggest the mandate goes to Clinton who won the popular vote. It would deny a mandate to Trump who finished second.
Trump won the EC. He did not receive the mandate of the voters.
Go look at what kind of political system is running countries with high populations. That will be the result if we allow high population states and cities running the country.
Not sure what you are trying to say here....
Here are the top 15 Countries in the world based upon population:
Of course it means something, it means that overall, more people voted for Clinton than for Trump, it does not change the outcome of the election and I never said it did. But you just don't want to hear it because you support Trump it doesn't support your narrative.
As I said, the popular vote in California is meaningless to the rest of the Union. If the fools in that state want to mindlessly vote for one political party like they do in 3rd world countries that is their business. The rest don't care.
That is better then I thought would happen in CAL for Trump.
Both presidential candidates stayed out of California. I believe if Trump went to California much more often he could have won the state.
No Bob, I live in California and it is not a state that would ever elect someone like Trump. Trump got 4,373,049 votes, Clinton got 8,543,280 and there are still about 599,000 votes to be counted.
To add 2 + 6 + 4, the second two numbers can be added to make a ten, so 2 + 6 + 4 = 2 + 10 = 12. (Associative property of addition.) Understand subtraction as an unknown-addend problem. For example, subtract 10 - 8 by finding the number that makes 10 when added to 8.
its simple ask the commoncore kids how to make it balance out for small and lager populated states!
I agree with your basic understanding of the why of the E.C., but not the importance of the 'states'. It was not by mistake that the founders adopted the name United States. Under the articles of Confederation, the original 13 were essentially independent of one another. There were issues with mutual defense, trade and more. The E.C. was part of the answer in forming our federal system, but also the states selecting their representatives to represent their interests.
The founders did not want, encourage, nor codify direct election of both, the people of the people's representatives, (the House of Representatives), and the individual states's representatives, (United States Senators).
The 17th Amendment was a huge mistake, making the selection of U.S. Senators direct election as well as the House of Representatives. The 17th was passed and ratified ~100 years ago. The 17th needs repealing to restore the full system of checks and balances, envisioned and intended by those who founded this country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by skepticratic
I wouldn't say that's necessarily quite the reason why. The actual reason is that the founders had a profound and reasoned fear of democracy. They felt allowing popular vote would lead to factions of people, in a modern context sometimes called "they tyranny of the majority" that would overwhelm and take the rights of other citizens. The term "United States" existed when the Declaration of Independence was written and that name stuck. The Article of Confederation was the first government "constitution" and it had no president. There was the president of congress, elected every year, who was in no way similar to the President of the constitution. So I don't think the name "United States" has anything to do with what you're saying.
That said, the popular vote still does not matter.
I think Donald would have won no matter what:..... hill-slides, hurricane's, wildfires, earthquakes,sink-holes, tsunamis, cyclones, tornadoes, and a total earth tilt.
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.
