What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official Donald Trump for President thread (3 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Loan Sharks said:
I hope not! The crats getting hacked, his global holdings  and transparency tweeting were all present before the election and people couldn't get enough of it and made him the next president. I love your plan of hoping the American people eat too much ice cream and give themselves tummy aches. The hide out a watch Donald implode strategy worked flawlessly during the campaign.
Click to expand...
Exactly.  This is what people aren't getting.  Trump was totally insane on the campaign trail and the rednecks lapped it up like kittens.  He's their messiah.  

 
TobiasFunke said:
Man, the Trumpkins are gonna be super mad when they find out that Ioffe was already leaving Politico for a better job at The Atlantic, one she'll still have.  I bet some of them will be so mad they'll suggest Ioffe, who is Jewism, should be gassed and her skin used to make lampshades.

Oh hey, they already did that!  And they did so after Melania Trump criticized a completely accurate profile of herself written by Ioffe. Where was the outrage for that?
Click to expand...
Find out! Oh my. It like we didn't know that President Trump already pulled the Atlantic press credentials. Always two steps behind the Donald. 

 
Assuming the world doesn't end and Trump doesn't quit, these next four years are going to be a blast in terms of attacking the right.  

So much material to work with. 

 
IvanKaramazov said:
This particular video is completely counterproductive, but I do agree with what they're pitching.  The electoral college exists, in part, to overrule the voters when they do something manifestly stupid.  Putting Trump in the White House qualifies as "manifestly stupid."  
Click to expand...
Yup.  I don't know why people are acting like this would be some sort of impossible act.  Electors going against the popular will of their state is no different than electors going against the collective popular will of the United States.  Both are legitimate aspects of the system. Those who choose Trump on Monday should be held accountable for their decision.

 
IvanKaramazov said:
This particular video is completely counterproductive, but I do agree with what they're pitching.  The electoral college exists, in part, to overrule the voters when they do something manifestly stupid.  Putting Trump in the White House qualifies as "manifestly stupid."  
Click to expand...
The only thing counterproductive is these celebs sitting around crying instead of packing up and moving out like they said they would. 

 
TobiasFunke said:
Yup.  I don't know why people are acting like this would be some sort of impossible act.  Electors going against the popular will of their state is no different than electors going against the collective popular will of the United States.  Both are legitimate aspects of the system. Those who choose Trump on Monday should be held accountable for their decision.
Click to expand...
You guys are acting like we zoomed straight from the Constitutional Convention to 2016.  The actual vote of the electoral college has been a mere formality for a long time.  I really don't want 538 random political hacks I've never heard of to have the power to disregard the votes of the electorate. 

And if the electoral college did manage to send the election to the House, the House would just pick Trump anyway. 

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
You guys are acting like we zoomed straight from the Constitutional Convention to 2016.  The actual vote of the electoral college has been a mere formality for a long time.  I really don't want 538 random political hacks I've never heard of to have the power to disregard the votes of the electorate. 

And if the electoral college did manage to send the election to the House, the House would just pick Trump anyway. 
Click to expand...
Times are a changing.  Crazy is the new normal.  

 
Slapdash said:
:lmao:   Nailed it
Click to expand...
The one thing required to save the meal—booze—turned into its greatest disappointment. Trump himself does not drink alcohol, a possible explanation for why the cocktails seemed to be concocted by a college freshman experimenting in their dorm room. The Tower was a tall glass filled with three types of rum and several types of fruit concentrate. (One person named it “The Cancun,” and slowly nursed the spring-break-colored drink over the next two hours like morphine.) The You’re Fired, an oversized Bloody Mary, appeared to be a chunky shrimp-cocktail sauce, heavy on the horseradish, mixed with ice and a lot of vodka. The Fifth Avenue—Grey Goose with Cointreau and a “splash of cranberry”—tasted like vodka mixed with Crystal Light, the ultimate drink for an 18-year-old pledging a sorority.
Click to expand...
:lmao:

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
You guys are acting like we zoomed straight from the Constitutional Convention to 2016.  The actual vote of the electoral college has been a mere formality for a long time.  I really don't want 538 random political hacks I've never heard of to have the power to disregard the votes of the electorate. 

And if the electoral college did manage to send the election to the House, the House would just pick Trump anyway. 
Click to expand...
Maybe, but I also really don't want a couple thousand conveniently located midwesterners and Floridians to have the power to disregard the clear preference of the electorate. Yet the system in place allows for both.  Either we defer to its wisdom or we don't. 

 
TobiasFunke said:
Maybe, but I also really don't want a couple thousand conveniently located midwesterners and Floridians to have the power to disregard the clear preference of the electorate. Yet the system in place allows for both.  Either we defer to its wisdom or we don't. 
Click to expand...
Trump's danger is in attacking our systems and institutions. Attacking a key system and institution is worse than counterproductive, it's dangerous.

 
TobiasFunke said:
Maybe, but I also really don't want a couple thousand conveniently located midwesterners and Floridians to have the power to disregard the clear preference of the electorate. Yet the system in place allows for both.  Either we defer to its wisdom or we don't. 
Click to expand...
I think the popular vote would be much more sensible.  But let's not take a stupid thing and make it even stupiderer.

 
TobiasFunke said:
Maybe, but I also really don't want a couple thousand conveniently located midwesterners and Floridians to have the power to disregard the clear preference of the electorate. Yet the system in place allows for both.  Either we defer to its wisdom or we don't. 
Click to expand...
We don't know this all. All this claptrap about the popular vote is silly. We don't have a popular vote election, so campaigns aren't built for them. We have no idea how a popular vote election would have played out. In fact, if it was all about popular vote, then there's a very good chance that Hillary wouldn't have won her primary (thanks super delegates!)

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
I think the popular vote would be much more sensible.  But let's not take a stupid thing and make it even stupiderer.
Click to expand...
I agree with the first part. I'm just pointing out that they're essentially the same stupid thing, just that one is on a larger scale than the other.  Either we want national elections where the candidate chosen by the most voters wins, or we're OK with rules that tinker with that fair, straightforward formula for outdated or irrational reasons.

 
Can you guys do me a favor and look up your electors in your state and tell me who they actually are? 

Who are these people? Seriously? Did you look when you voted? I recognized a Dem & a GOP when I voted. The Dem was a political hack of the highest (worst) order. The Gopper was pretty much the same. I know the Dem would never, ever, ever change her vote, even if they found her candidate in the most horrible, compromising, disqualifying situation. That was just "a name" I recognize. 

Point is now you care.

Overall this effort is harmful to opposing Trump. 

 
TobiasFunke said:
I agree with the first part. I'm just pointing out that they're essentially the same stupid thing, just that one is on a larger scale than the other.  Either we want national elections where the candidate chosen by the most voters wins, or we're OK with rules that tinker with that fair, straightforward formula for outdated or irrational reasons.
Click to expand...
I see it as an enormous difference.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
You guys are acting like we zoomed straight from the Constitutional Convention to 2016.  The actual vote of the electoral college has been a mere formality for a long time.  I really don't want 538 random political hacks I've never heard of to have the power to disregard the votes of the electorate. 

And if the electoral college did manage to send the election to the House, the House would just pick Trump anyway. 
Click to expand...
But we might be able to abolish the Electoral College.  That would be a great byproduct.

 
TobiasFunke said:
Maybe, but I also really don't want a couple thousand conveniently located midwesterners and Floridians to have the power to disregard the clear preference of the electorate. Yet the system in place allows for both.  Either we defer to its wisdom or we don't. 
Click to expand...
Take California out and she didn't win the popular vote. Trump won more states than Hillary did as well.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Can you guys do me a favor and look up your electors in your state and tell me who they actually are? 

Who are these people? Seriously? Did you look when you voted? I recognized a Dem & a GOP when I voted. The Dem was a political hack of the highest (worst) order. The Gopper was pretty much the same. I know the Dem would never, ever, ever change her vote, even if they found her candidate in the most horrible, compromising, disqualifying situation. That was just "a name" I recognize. 

Point is now you care.

Overall this effort is harmful to opposing Trump. 
Click to expand...
I just looked at the list of electors from Maryland and I don't recognize any of the Dems that will be voting.  If Trump had won Maryland, one of the Republican electors would have been former RNC chief turned talking head Michael Steele.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
I just looked at the list of electors from Maryland and I don't recognize any of the Dems that will be voting.  If Trump had won Maryland, one of the Republican electors would have been former RNC chief turned talking head Michael Steele.
Click to expand...
I definitely know a few of the Louisiana electors.  In fact, I'm pretty sure at least one of them is one of the 20 "faithless" being touted by the media.

 
TobiasFunke said:
I agree with the first part. I'm just pointing out that they're essentially the same stupid thing, just that one is on a larger scale than the other.  Either we want national elections where the candidate chosen by the most voters wins, or we're OK with rules that tinker with that fair, straightforward formula for outdated or irrational reasons.
Click to expand...
To clarify, I'm not saying the EC should elect Hillary.  I'm advocating for a sane, qualified Republican TBD.  In other words, the Republicans won the election, but Trump just can't be trusted in a position of power.  I'm fine with telling the party "Okay, you guys won, but you need to pick somebody else."  Honestly, we might as well go ahead and get it out of the way now before Trump gets removed from office because he knew about Russia's involvement (say) or the self-dealing (say) or whatever else comes along.

 
IvanKaramazov said:
To clarify, I'm not saying the EC should elect Hillary.  I'm advocating for a sane, qualified Republican TBD.  In other words, the Republicans won the election, but Trump just can't be trusted in a position of power.  I'm fine with telling the party "Okay, you guys won, but you need to pick somebody else."  Honestly, we might as well go ahead and get it out of the way now before Trump gets removed from office because he knew about Russia's involvement (say) or the self-dealing (say) or whatever else comes along.
Click to expand...
I agree.  Put Kasich or Rubio in there.  Trump is going to get people killed.  

 
15 hundred dumb tweets since Trump's last press conference. Maybe Putin will permit him to talk early next year. Lots of stuff to cover.

 
IvanKaramazov said:
To clarify, I'm not saying the EC should elect Hillary.  I'm advocating for a sane, qualified Republican TBD.  In other words, the Republicans won the election, but Trump just can't be trusted in a position of power.  I'm fine with telling the party "Okay, you guys won, but you need to pick somebody else."  Honestly, we might as well go ahead and get it out of the way now before Trump gets removed from office because he knew about Russia's involvement (say) or the self-dealing (say) or whatever else comes along.
Click to expand...
Yeah, admittedly this is where I'm acting in a partisan way.  I think I might prefer President Trump to President Pence.  Hard to say for sure.

 
Henry Ford said:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
You guys are acting like we zoomed straight from the Constitutional Convention to 2016.  The actual vote of the electoral college has been a mere formality for a long time.  I really don't want 538 random political hacks I've never heard of to have the power to disregard the votes of the electorate. 

And if the electoral college did manage to send the election to the House, the House would just pick Trump anyway. 
Click to expand...
But we might be able to abolish the Electoral College.  That would be a great byproduct
Click to expand...
Best case scenario is we get a garden-variety republican AND get rid of the electoral college.  

 
GroveDiesel said:
We don't know this all. All this claptrap about the popular vote is silly. We don't have a popular vote election, so campaigns aren't built for them. We have no idea how a popular vote election would have played out. In fact, if it was all about popular vote, then there's a very good chance that Hillary wouldn't have won her primary (thanks super delegates!)
Click to expand...
I was speaking about it hypothetically- what the rules are and what they should be. I'm saying either you're OK with the electoral college process or you're not.  The process allows electors to part with the state's popular choice, just as the electoral college allows the states to part with the nation's choice.  It's the same basic premise.  Either you want to get rid of that mess and decide elections based on the collective will of the American voter, or you don't.

But you are wrong about the popular vote talk being "claptrap." Mandates, or the absence of them, matter a lot.  That's why people always talk about them, and discuss voting patterns and margins of victory even in elections where the popular total and electoral winner are the same.  Every politician and talking head knows this and engages in this analysis after every election. Trump knows it too, which is why he threw that hissy fit and made up that nonsense about the illegal California voters.

Also, just my opinion but  I think you're wrong about the popular vote and Clinton at both the primary and general election level.  I'm not gonna get into the super delegate nonsense, that's been refuted over and over.  But at the general, Dems would likely do better because they could focus their campaigning and GOTV efforts on high- density areas.  The GOP doesn't have that option.  As I said before, imagine the gains Clinton could have in, say, Houston alone if she'd chosen to campaign there and do GOTV there instead of ignoring the city and its huge African-American and Hispanic populations.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

DA RAIDERS
Pick a fantasy team for the Tour de France. There will be prizes!
Replies
35
Views
3K
DA RAIDERS
DA RAIDERS
kutta
***Official 2025 Footballguy T-Shirt Exchange - OCT 12 SHIPPING DEADLINE (extended 2 weeks)***
2 3
Replies
135
Views
3K
Keerock
Keerock
scorchy
Any banking guys that can offer solutions to a vexing issue?
Replies
31
Views
480
Mrs. Rannous
Mrs. Rannous

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top