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.
In important areas like Philly and Detroit? Yes. It's amazing to me how the (D)'s still do not understand why these places didn't turn out. It's the same reason WV has abandoned the (D)'s as much as they have.
In important areas like Philly and Detroit? Yes. It's amazing to me how the (D)'s still do not understand why these places didn't turn out. It's the same reason WV has abandoned the (D)'s as much as they have.
In the end, if you take California out of the equation, she lost the popular vote also. So, she won California and you believe that should be enough. You also ignore that the system was rigged to get her that far to start with.
It's an entirely different country today if things were not rigged to start with.
I'm sticking to what I've always done. Labor Force Participation Rate. (The higher the better.) Am I impressed with Trump's accomplishments? No not really. But I have to acknowledge that we're no longer constantly getting worse and worse like we saw under Obama. Trump's tenure has seen the LFPR flatline, which frankly debunks the myths that Dems were constantly using as excuses for Obama's terrible LFPR performance. Stopping the bleeding is a good thing.
You can color me impressed when Trump gets the LFPR moving upwards.
Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Seasonally Adjusted
Labor force status: Civilian labor force participation rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over
You Realize that the current LFPR trend started in 2013. Don't worry it will begin its downward movement soon.
Sure, but it can't be said that she lost due to her policies.
I'm willing to grant that while what Hillary tried to pass off as policy prescriptions didn't help her a bit, they may not fully explain why she lost.
The real reason Hillary lost is that, as a candidate, she was a gigantic flaming bag of dog crap set on America's doorstep by the Democratic National Committee. It went something like this:
DNC: "You want a presidential candidate? OK...here's an enormous flaming bag of poop, dressed up like a candidate. Enjoy!"
As a result of this offering, voters in NY and CA in effect said, "Yes! We want a flaming bag of dog poop for president, and we will vote for that bag!"
People in the rest of the country, in contrast, said, "What...are you kidding? Take that flaming bag of dog crap somewhere else. We don't want it."
You're using that term in a doublespeak fashion -less equals more, or the will of the people, now becomes the will of the smaller group of people.
sorry Joe you advocate a form of democracy that the founders rightfully feared. It has been proven time and time again for the last 3000 years to be a CAUSE of the failure of democracy.
We require a candidate to not simply garner the majority of votes, but to appeal to people from across the entire country. that's vastly more difficult and it is a safeguard.
200 years ago the founders understood a very simple rule. In a direct democracy, he who controls the mob, rules.
the version of democracy you advocate for, is exactly that direct democracy which leads to mob rule which leads to the end of democracy.
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.
