Sign in to follow this  
Princess of Tap

Mike Pence-- Who is He and What is his Agenda?

354 posts in this topic

The link posted by 6666 from The Intercept, the third post on this thread, features this comment by Glenn Greenwald:

 

"A big reason why she’s going to win the popular vote is because the number of votes she received in places like New York City and California increase significantly over what even Obama received in large part obviously due to fear and horror over the prospect of a Trump presidency. But I think that that’s really cold comfort for a couple of reasons. Number one is because campaigns don’t cater themselves to the popular vote but to the Electoral College. Who knows what the popular vote total would have been had Trump spent time in California or New York trying to increase his vote total in those places. He instead ignored those as he should have done and we have an Electoral College system, that’s where the campaigns devote themselves to winning."

 

The big point that Hillary diehards love to emphasize, i.e., because Hillary won the popular vote then she really won the election is hereby diminished if not completely eradicated.

 

https://theintercept...ump-presidency/

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't disagree more.    His supporters are so celebrity driven they will give him a pass as long as the Trump admin secures the border (which doesn't require an actual wall),   implements employment checks (e.g. e-verity),  restarts employment raids by ICE and increases deportation.

What exactly don't you agree with? Also how do you or ANYBODY know WHAT Mister It's-my-prerogative-to-change-my-mind will do?

 

If we don't get a wall, we will get a beautiful fence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The link posted by 6666 from The Intercept, the third post on this thread, features this comment by Glenn Greenwald:

 

"A big reason why she’s going to win the popular vote is because the number of votes she received in places like New York City and California increase significantly over what even Obama received in large part obviously due to fear and horror over the prospect of a Trump presidency. But I think that that’s really cold comfort for a couple of reasons. Number one is because campaigns don’t cater themselves to the popular vote but to the Electoral College. Who knows what the popular vote total would have been had Trump spent time in California or New York trying to increase his vote total in those places. He instead ignored those as he should have done and we have an Electoral College system, that’s where the campaigns devote themselves to winning."

 

The big point that Hillary diehards love to emphasize, i.e., because Hillary won the popular vote then she really won the election is hereby diminished if not completely eradicated.

Could be valid, but will really never know.  Would Trump have had to tailor his campaign and rhetoric for CA and NY and thereby maybe lost more votes in the states he did carry?  Would he have had to spend so much time there that he would have lost in other places.

A good part of Trump's success was the free media coverage for 18 months and his willingness to have public events as often as he could.  Clinton didn't do the latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WHO IS MIKE PENCE? A PATRIOT. WHAT IS HIS AGENDA? MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.

That's no agenda. "Make America Great Again" is just an empty, pie in the sky platitude.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's no agenda. "Make America Great Again" is just an empty, pie in the sky platitude.

Not true wise guy. You lost. You lost. Check out Trump's official sites and you will be given an outline of his agenda but you won't. You're a waste of time.

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not true wise guy. You lost. You lost. Check out Trump's official sites and you will be given an outline of his agenda but you won't. You're a waste of time.

;)

Ouch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last night, I sat through TCM's airing of The Sorrow And The Pity. Interesting stuff... those four years in France, 1940-1944. Made me think of the next four years...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh c'mon now, people...both you here on The Left AND The Right! Haven't you figured out by now that Donny's agenda and his administration can and will be best described as "W-2"?!!

 

(...and nope, I ain't talkin' about any I.R.S. forms here...I'm talkin' about it bein' a freakin' REHASH of George W. Bush's term in office...nothin' more and nothin' less, and with its "mouthpiece" owning of the very same level of "intelligent" articulation as the other)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly don't you agree with? Also how do you or ANYBODY know WHAT Mister It's-my-prerogative-to-change-my-mind will do?

 

If we don't get a wall, we will get a beautiful fence.

 

Trump changes his mind to put in place more reasonable policies and you have an issue with that.

 

What does that make you?

 

You clearly don't understand what pandering is.   Trump was the ultimate politician; slick and deceitful.

 

But I'm NOT going to complain when he changes direction to modify his positions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last night, I sat through TCM's airing of The Sorrow And The Pity. Interesting stuff... those four years in France, 1940-1944. Made me think of the next four years...

 

 

LOL. It could be that bad.......

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump was the ultimate politician; slick and deceitful.

 

 

He doesn't have to venture very far to drain that swamp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly don't you agree with? Also how do you or ANYBODY know WHAT Mister It's-my-prerogative-to-change-my-mind will do?

 

If we don't get a wall, we will get a beautiful fence.

On 60 Minutes when asked if he would still build the Wall, he gave an unequivocal YES. Most of it will be the Wall with fences and the latest technology used to crack down on illegal immigration.

 

I lived in Texas and it makes complete sense. A wall is not feasible in certain sections on the Texas Mexico border. He told Lesley Stahl I'm good at construction.   

 

The MSM is stirring the pot on a non issue.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYCsC08bLxU

 

logo.png

 

Great Again Gov. > https://www.greatagain.gov/policy/immigration.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be valid, but will really never know.  Would Trump have had to tailor his campaign and rhetoric for CA and NY and thereby maybe lost more votes in the states he did carry?  Would he have had to spend so much time there that he would have lost in other places.

A good part of Trump's success was the free media coverage for 18 months and his willingness to have public events as often as he could.  Clinton didn't do the latter.

 

Valid enough to instill cold comfort. The claim that Hillary really won due to popular vote is sour grapes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what human being could possibly get through a fence? Truly impregnable. It would take 2-3 minutes to get through it, even. Who has that kind of patience?

 

But empty symbols placate the masses, so fence away, I say.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what human being could possibly get through a fence? Truly impregnable. It would take 2-3 minutes to get through it, even. Who has that kind of patience?

 

But empty symbols placate the masses, so fence away, I say.

 

 

LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess a "fence" wouldn't have sounded like the big bad wolf on the campaign trail, would it.  Just another hypocrite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Valid enough to instill cold comfort. The claim that Hillary really won due to popular vote is sour grapes.

 

 

No, it's a fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last night, I sat through TCM's airing of The Sorrow And The Pity. Interesting stuff... those four years in France, 1940-1944. Made me think of the next four years...

 

I caught bits and pieces and was fascinated by it. Yes, Phillipe Petain's quote (approximate) "I make you a gift, and the gift is me," reminded me of Trump. For one thing. His "new" government was authoritarian and not really French at all. He was popular but only because the war was going on. He wouldn't have been accepted otherwise. The interviews were fascinating. TSATP is on my list for a full viewing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's a fact.

 

She had more popular votes but both candidates campaigned for electoral votes because that's the system in place. Therefore, the popular vote count is not valid. If popular votes determined elections Trump would not have ignored California and New York, two of the most populated states. And Clinton's itinerary would have been different too. But that would have been an entirely different election that the one we had and of course we have no idea how that one would have turned out.

 

Under our current Electoral College system, it is disingenuous to maintain that Hillary won or should have won the election due to more popular votes. It's not a valid argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Valid enough to instill cold comfort. The claim that Hillary really won due to popular vote is sour grapes.

Actually the election is not over yet and won't be until Dec. 19 when the electors gather in Washington to cast the official ballots for president.  People may think they voted for Trump or Clinton, but they actually voted for a slate of electors who promised to vote for a particular candidate on Dec. 19.

They are supposed to vote as their state did, but only a few states actually have laws requiring that.  The penalty for not voting as your state did is a small misdemenor fine.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She had more popular votes but both candidates campaigned for electoral votes because that's the system in place. Therefore, the popular vote count is not valid. If popular votes determined elections Trump would not have ignored California and New York, two of the most populated states. And Clinton's itinerary would have been different too. But that would have been an entirely different election that the one we had and of course we have no idea how that one would have turned out.

 

Under our current Electoral College system, it is disingenuous to maintain that Hillary won or should have won the election due to more popular votes. It's not a valid argument.

 

 

If you live in a real democracy it is. We dont. This is the 2nd time in 16 years this has happened.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you live in a real democracy it is. We dont. This is the 2nd time in 16 years this has happened.

The electoral college would have been abolished years ago if it regularly happened that a different candidate won the popular vote than the one who won the electoral vote. Now it has happened twice in 16 years. Time for it to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us