Checking for a gold fringe on the flag on Inauguration Day?
Regards,
Shodan
Liberal dopers learn from the best (bolding mine):
Okay, I laughed.
Hey, while you’re here, maybe you can tell me… Do you think Trump understood what he was doing with his call to Taiwan and subsequent callouts on twitter? Or did he not understand it at first, and then made a snap judgment to pretend he knew what he was talking about when he made those tweets? Or did he, at no point in the proceedings, know what he was doing or why people were freaking out about it?
Also, have you figured out how this is relevant to the quoted post?
I think he knew exactly what he was doing and thought, why the hell not? And he was right. The Chinese have since stated that the US is too important a partner to let things come between them and they are extremely pleased with Trump’s choice of Ambassador who is a long-standing friend of China.
Why the hell not indeed? Honesty and balls in international affairs is a nice change after Obama’s tepid stewardship.
Plenty of “honesty and balls” in Obama’s foreign policy, unless you’re defining “honesty and balls” by the John Bolton “WE’RE AMERICA SO FUCK YOU” approach to diplomacy.
*There were seven “faithless electors” - the name given to electors who vote contrary to the candidate that won their state - five among Democrats and two for Republicans.
Four Washington state delegates opted not to vote for Clinton, the state’s winner. Three voted for former Secretary of State Colin Powell and one for Faith Spotted Eagle, who had been fighting the Dakota Access Pipeline in North Dakota.
Hawaii elector David Mulinix, a Democrat, cast a ballot for Sanders over Clinton.
“They can call me faithless, but the point is if we don’t think someone’s qualified – and Hillary Clinton I do not feel is qualified,” he said.
Three other electors - in Minnesota, Maine and Colorado - attempted to switch their votes from Clinton but were unsuccessful.
Minnesota elector Muhammad Abdurrahman, a delegate for Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders during the primary season, attempted to switch his vote but was replaced by an alternate. Maine elector David Bright attempted to vote for Sanders but was rebuffed and switched his vote to Clinton.
…Recent efforts have put pressure on electors to abandon Trump in favor of Clinton or a GOP replacement. That pressure grew as Clinton’s lead in the popular vote topped 2.6 million*.
Pressure? What pressure? Several out of work actors, who make their living pretending to be someone they are not, made a video telling electors that they would stand by them IF THEY CHANGED THEIR VOTE. Of course, if the electors ignored the whining of the out of work actors, the sun will still rise in the East.
The news media also chose to hype the stories of the possibility of electors changing sides. I wonder if any of the Hillary electors would have defected if the media outlets hadn’t repeatedly told them it was OK to change? Oh well, life goes on.
4 in Washington rejected Hillary
1 in Hawaii rejected Hillary
1 in Minnesota rejected Hillary
1 in Maine rejected Hillary.
1 in Colorado rejected Hillary.
8 total but several were replaced.
and
2 in Texas rejected Trump.
(post shortened)
The leader of Taiwan called Trump to congratulate Trump on his apparent victory in the race for POTUS. Maybe she’ll call again now that Hillary was once again trounced by Trump in the EC? Since it’s now official.
According to Donald Trump, a liar, the leader of Taiwan spontaneously called him.
Thanks!
Thanks!
So… 304-227-7?
Yup. I’m what is known as a hypocrite. But at least I’m honest about it.
I believe whatever pushes my values (within reason). When states rights do that, I support them. When they do not, I do not.
It’s a much, much bigger deal to reject the winning candidate than the losing candidate. There’s absolutely zero chance that any Trump electors will defect to Clinton, so why not make a statement? An ineffectual and soon-forgotten protest, but hey, that’s part and parcel with being American. I am a bit chagrined that so many Clinton electors chose to make ineffectual protests, but as I said before, most of them appear to be protesting the Electoral system itself, not Clinton specifically.
But with Trump electors, every changed vote raises the risk of making your candidate lose. How did those two Texan electors know that 35 other electors wouldn’t revolt? Did they know?
As long as Trump electors weren’t voting for Hillary, they could protest-vote all they wanted with no fear of throwing the election. Even if Trump fell below 270, it would still send the election to a Republican-controlled House of Representatives.
How can you be so certain the House won’t select someone who didn’t receive the most electoral votes? It’s happened before.
Yes, but at least it would most likely be a Republican - Trump or no Trump. So the Trump electors had little to fear.
Yeah yeah. By your standards I would be hard left, if Bernie’s a communist. I never noticed any difference between Democrats and Republicans when it came to oppressing the common man back in the Gilded Age. Most of those things you laud were — inadequately enough — done by progressives, some of whom were Republican such as Teddy or Nixon even; the Democratic Party is rarely in lockstep with progressives, whom it regards as socialists and hippies who rock the boat.
Actually… if one hoped for a reversal of fortune for Hillary, it was a far bigger deal that her electors flipped. Suppose 34 other electors flipped then those 5 votes would have given her the presidency; yet those 5 votes are wasted as it is: had they stayed with her she would have more of a case of being an alternate winner.
As far as protests go, I rather doubt Electors to the Electoral College object to the existence of the Electoral College.
He was too much of a commie for Texas.
No GOP elector would have voted for Hillary. P.E.R.I.O.D. Democrats can get away with silly thing like voting for Colin Powell, but Republicans are downright fanatical about party solidarity.
Perhaps their party discipline is soviet, yet I read a good deal how their revulsion to the vulgar demagogue Donald would swing the vote to whomever the speaker personally preferred.
Still what was good enough for that vile little fellow Romney, type of regular Republicanism, who mucksmattered Trump as rival, then came a-crawling post-election, was no doubt good enough for them.
Still don’t see how Trump can be not preferable to Cruz, Romney, Walker or Ryan as pressie.
It’s scary you don’t recognize the importance of consistency in law or precedent. You shouldn’t run a country according to short term whimsy.