U.S Election 2016

Originally Posted by Kursk

Mr Trump will be the new US President. The UK will leave the EU.

Go with the facts and save yourself all that hand-wringing angst

I'm not denying he is President. I am criticising his actions as President Elect.

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by Damien

I'm not denying he is President. I am criticising his actions as President Elect.

And you're not in the least being prematurely negative about 2 democratic elections that didn't go your preferred way..

You are going to be apoplectic with rage when Nigel becomes the new ambassador to the US

Originally Posted by Kursk

And you're not in the least being prematurely negative about 2 democratic elections that didn't go your preferred way..

You are going to be apoplectic with rage when Nigel becomes the new ambassador to the US

Nah I wouldn't feel rage, I don't tend to have such visceral emotions to the news, although I do think it would be a mistake to appoint him and don't believe May will.

I am obviously negative about Trump because I don't think he has the ability, temperament or decency to be President. However he will be President and I will continue to be negative about him until he proves me wrong - I don't expect he will. I won't be the only one criticizing him and you should be more concerned about more prominent people doing so than some insignificant poster on the internet such as myself.

Although I would advise that you should focus more on the issue than the poster.

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by Damien

Nah I wouldn't feel rage, I don't tend to have such visceral emotions to the news, although I do think it would be a mistake to appoint him and don't believe May will.

I am obviously negative about Trump because I don't think he has the ability, temperament or decency to be President. However he will be President and I will continue to be negative about him until he proves me wrong - I don't expect he will. I won't be the only one criticizing him and you should be more concerned about more prominent people doing so than some insignificant poster on the internet such as myself.

Although I would advise that you should focus more on the issue than the poster.

I am focussing on the issue; it is incidental that you are the poster; don't be so sensitive . I am 'concerned' that even before either have started a new President and Brexit is being denigrated. Whatever happened to fair play?

When the facts change, I will change my opinion (to quote someone whose name I can't recall) but I won't be making my mind up before then.

Originally Posted by Kursk

I am focussing on the issue; it is incidental that you are the poster; don't be so sensitive . I am 'concerned' that even before either have started a new President and Brexit is being denigrated. Whatever happened to fair play?

When the facts change, I will change my opinion (to quote someone whose name I can't recall) but I won't be making my mind up before then.

It's opposition. Not really sure fair play is an issue, I am not lying about him to the best of my knowledge. My criticism of Trump remains the same as it was before the election.

As for Brexit I've posted good news about it as well but largely I still think that is a mistake as well. I want it to go well because I would lose out if it didn't.

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by Damien

It's opposition. Not really sure fair play is an issue, I am not lying about him to the best of my knowledge. My criticism of Trump remains the same as it was before the election.

As for Brexit I've posted good news about it as well but largely I still think that is a mistake as well. I want it to go well because I would lose out if it didn't.

Ok fair enough. For my part I don't feel I really know anything about President Trump. I have seen the election circus but I'm not sure what we see in that is anything to go by. I too want Brexit to work but I know there are risks so we're on the same page.

And there I was doing my best to be a nice person and not get rested again

Originally Posted by Kursk

Ok fair enough. For my part I don't feel I really know anything about President Trump. I have seen the election circus but I'm not sure what we see in that is anything to go by. I too want Brexit to work but I know there are risks so we're on the same page.

And there I was doing my best to be a nice person and not get rested again

Thing is with Trump we have years of experience of his views,actions and attitude ,there isn't really much guesswork .We know he hasn't the first clue how to run a country the size of America so he will rely heavily on advisers and other politicians to do the work for him while he takes the credit or blame depending on how things go.

Brexit is pure guesswork we have no idea how it will work or how long it will take

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by martyh

Brexit is pure guesswork we have no idea how it will work or how long it will take

Hit the nail on the head there Martyn. Who on earth would vote for that unknown? The penny will drop soon that we're in deep 'do do's'.

As for Trump his 'advisers' seem to consist of immediate family. Suggestions that he might not be that bad after all are wishful thinking.

[Kursk]

All Presidents, and other leaders for that matter, have advisers. Statesmanship might be a quality some do not expect in the new President. As for brexit, the Remain alternative is possibly just as much of an unknown.

Originally Posted by Mr K

. Who on earth would vote for that unknown? .

Just over half the voters .Just because something is unknown doesn't mean we shouldn't do it after all the Yanks are testing the unknown as well

Originally Posted by martyh

Just over half the voters .Just because something is unknown doesn't mean we shouldn't do it after all the Yanks are testing the unknown as well

Actually, just under half the voters...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/p...nton/94214826/

Q: Who won the popular vote?

A: Clinton's lead of more than 2 million votes, according to the Cook Political Report, continues to increase, largely due to an influx of absentee and provisional ballots still being counted in California. She has about 64.2 million votes to Trump's 62.2 million; her margin in California alone is more than 3.7 million.

However, Trump won the majority of the Electoral College votes, which is what counts.

Everyone in the USA is obsessing about the popular vote as if they never knew about the electoral college.

The college acts to give slightly greater weight to the votes of people living in smaller states who might otherwise be ignored as candidates concentrated their campaigning and their policy offerings on the relatively few areas of high population density across the states. Both candidates were fully aware that it was college votes they needed to win, and targeted their campaign resources accordingly.

Had the aim of the game been to win the highest number of ballots cast, then they would have played it by those rules. But that wasn't the game, and that's not how they played it.

Agreed - I was just clarifying an incorrect assertion.

Originally Posted by Chris

The college acts to give slightly greater weight to the votes of people living in smaller states who might otherwise be ignored as candidates concentrated their campaigning and their policy offerings on the relatively few areas of high population density across the states. Both candidates were fully aware that it was college votes they needed to win, and targeted their campaign resources accordingly.

Had the aim of the game been to win the highest number of ballots cast, then they would have played it by those rules. But that wasn't the game, and that's not how they played it.

I agree with the argument the popular vote isn't a useful measure in this case because people would have voted differently. Could have been more or less for Clinton. Trump is the legitimate President. However the popular vote reminds us this was a close election and it's a divided country.

I think the electoral college has become a bad system though. It exists largely to separate the voters from the college votes (i.e the electors) to theoretically act as a check in case the voters did something stupid and because it's the United States of America and the concept of Federalism was even stronger when the college was implemented. The President was more of a distant figure to them.

I have seen the image floating around about how it's there to counterweight the coasts but America didn't have an West Coast when it was set up. It didn't have the area from the louisiana purchase either. It was a small collection of states on the East Coast. It was set up in a different time for a different America.

This is also the second time it's happened in the last 20 years. It's a problem.

The reason why something is created is often different than the reason it persists. The USA has many examples of that principle - gun ownership being one of them. The continuing constitutional right to bear arms has precisely nothing to do with the likelihood of an attempt by the British to recolonise. In our own country, arguments for retaining the monarchy would be unrecognisable to someone like Alfred the Great. Both times in the last 20 years the mismatch between the popular vote and the college has favoured the Republicans. It remains to be seen whether a future democrat president will attempt to change it.