Trump basically asking the Russians to hack Hilary Clinton, not sure that's going to engender support for him?
@HuffPostTech
Searches for "Donald Trump treason" spike following Russia comments
US Presidential Election 2016
-
marksmeets302
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 4:37 pm
Both candidates are so tremendously unpopular, and the hatred against them grows with every tweet. Wouldn't surprise me if the odds of the libertarian Gary Johnson are going to shorten dramatically.
I'd imagine it's worth an outside shot. I would say I've seen an election like it, but we just had a carbon copy in the UK.
I think you could have quite a few Democrats voting Republican and vice versa as a protest. That could really mix things up. One thing for sure, is that the world is very mixed up at the moment.
When the financial crash happened I consulted with somebody and he just about got the current situation spot on.
I think you could have quite a few Democrats voting Republican and vice versa as a protest. That could really mix things up. One thing for sure, is that the world is very mixed up at the moment.
When the financial crash happened I consulted with somebody and he just about got the current situation spot on.
-
marksmeets302
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 4:37 pm
Nice article in a local newspaper (http://fd.nl/economie-politiek/1161915/ ... -de-kiezer , google translate is your friend) today. An interview with Nobel prize winner Eric Maskin. The gist is that he believes the way the Americans (and the rest of the world for that matter) handles elections is often unfair. This shows especially in the result of the republic nomination. Because Trumps had so many opponents, he basically won because the votes against him went to several different candidates.
Nicolas de Condorcet, a french mathematician and philosopher from the 18th century proposed a different way . He said it would be better if you rank the people you vote for. It's very reasonable to think that someone voting for Jeb Bush would rather have his vote go to Ted Cruz or Rand Paul than Trump. So he would say Bush gets 5 points, Cruz 3 and Paul 1. A bit like the eurovision songfestival (and now I have LeTiss attention as well
)
Maskin said that election procedures only change when a disaster happens. That he names Trump as president as such a disaster shows us his political preference...
Nicolas de Condorcet, a french mathematician and philosopher from the 18th century proposed a different way . He said it would be better if you rank the people you vote for. It's very reasonable to think that someone voting for Jeb Bush would rather have his vote go to Ted Cruz or Rand Paul than Trump. So he would say Bush gets 5 points, Cruz 3 and Paul 1. A bit like the eurovision songfestival (and now I have LeTiss attention as well
)Maskin said that election procedures only change when a disaster happens. That he names Trump as president as such a disaster shows us his political preference...
"Maskin said that election procedures only change when a disaster happens. That he names Trump as president as such a disaster shows us his political preference..."
but that is a problem.
trump winning is no disaster to trump supporters quite the opposite i would a assume.
to liberals and the left quite possibly they would consider trump winning a disaster, but not the right.
bit like brexit really, its only a bad or good depending whether your part of the 52% or the 48%.
but that is a problem.
trump winning is no disaster to trump supporters quite the opposite i would a assume.
to liberals and the left quite possibly they would consider trump winning a disaster, but not the right.
bit like brexit really, its only a bad or good depending whether your part of the 52% or the 48%.
-
Dublin_Flyer
- Posts: 692
- Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 10:39 am
Is that not just proportional representation?marksmeets302 wrote:
Nicolas de Condorcet, a french mathematician and philosopher from the 18th century proposed a different way . He said it would be better if you rank the people you vote for. It's very reasonable to think that someone voting for Jeb Bush would rather have his vote go to Ted Cruz or Rand Paul than Trump. So he would say Bush gets 5 points, Cruz 3 and Paul 1. A bit like the eurovision songfestival (and now I have LeTiss attention as well
There's a good example of how it works in my constituency in Dublin West in the last local election. The Sinn Fein candidate Donnelly had a high number of 1st round votes but only 1 candidate had reached the quota so far. After the eliminated candidates and elected candidates excess preferences were divided out, he got less than 50 votes transferred to him, and just 20 in the following round eventually getting eliminated at the 5th count.
In a nutshell there's a hardcore of voters who will go with any candidate Sinn Fein put out, other voters will give their 2nd,3rd etc choice to other parties to stop the SF candidate getting the seat.
http://elections.independent.ie/electio ... ublin-west
Likewise if there was that choice in the US, voters could have the independent as choice 1, and Clinton as choice 2. Basically saying I want the independent candidate, if not them I want Clinton, thus keeping the vote away from Trump but still making their vote meaningful even if the independent has a large following but only a 0.5% first choice vote count.
-
vankancisco
- Posts: 75
- Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2015 8:54 pm
The EU referendum highlighted how much of a failure the political system and 'democracy' actually is. Voting Yes or No on an issue so complex meant both campaigns were always going to narrow the debate and play on emotions and stir up hatred and resentment. As Arron Banks stated 'Facts don't work' At least he admitted it afterwards. The American Presidential contest is another prime example of how democracy is failing.
why is it considered that "The American Presidential contest is another prime example of how democracy is failing." or "The EU referendum highlighted how much of a failure the political system and 'democracy' actually is".
why a failure and not considered to be what it is,that the respective electorates of both democracies (and members of two legal democratic political parties in the usa) , voted and the majority result carried (won)?
if the results went the other way, would they be considered failures?
why a failure and not considered to be what it is,that the respective electorates of both democracies (and members of two legal democratic political parties in the usa) , voted and the majority result carried (won)?
if the results went the other way, would they be considered failures?
-
Dublin_Flyer
- Posts: 692
- Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 10:39 am
I'm trying to think of major sporting or cultural/tv moments in the US calendar between now and the election where Trump might say more stupid stuff or tweet without thinking. Olympics are a good possibility perhaps.
If only the Superbowl was at the end of October, and the MVP with the winning touchdown throw as time expired was the black Muslim son of Mexican immigrants (both doctors) who were naturalised citizens and registered Democrat voters. Trumps twitter might just have a brain haemorrhage!
Clintons PR team have a pretty easy job at the moment - Hillary, on Mondays event, don't say anything stupid or controversial. Same for Tuesday to Sundays events. Continue until November.
If only the Superbowl was at the end of October, and the MVP with the winning touchdown throw as time expired was the black Muslim son of Mexican immigrants (both doctors) who were naturalised citizens and registered Democrat voters. Trumps twitter might just have a brain haemorrhage!
Clintons PR team have a pretty easy job at the moment - Hillary, on Mondays event, don't say anything stupid or controversial. Same for Tuesday to Sundays events. Continue until November.
Trump's campaign is over thank goodness - he finally said something *so* stupid it ends here even for him.
Personally I don't think he really wanted to win, he was just running for kicks.
I thought he was entertaining for a while, but the joke had long-ago worn thin and now he's just plain annoying. The man's a complete ass really.
Personally I don't think he really wanted to win, he was just running for kicks.
I thought he was entertaining for a while, but the joke had long-ago worn thin and now he's just plain annoying. The man's a complete ass really.
-
marksmeets302
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 4:37 pm
I had expected Johnsons odds to shorten after all this. They did drop to 200, but that was before Trumps "advice" regarding Clinton. Say you are a republican, and no way you're letting Trump hold the key to the nuclear arsenal. But you hate Clinton just as bad. Either you're not going to vote at all or you're doing some kind of protest vote. Turnout could be a bit disappointing this time.