|
Post by DADDY O on Jan 22, 2017 13:01:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sherri on Jan 22, 2017 20:09:13 GMT
There was a march in Melbourne/ Never heard of it. I saw one photo of some women in Sydney. One had a banner that said "Not my president". Well, I guess that's pretty accurate. He's not. We've got a PM.
What is the point of anyone outside US protesting? They may not like him but Americans voted him in, it's their call, not ours.
Personally if the situation were reversed and I had voted in a PM here and saw people overseas protesting, it would put my back up. I would think, butt out of it. If you don't pay taxes here & don't vote, not your business. If Trump started to invade our own countries, then that's a different matter.
|
|
|
Post by DADDY O on Jan 22, 2017 21:43:59 GMT
It was a women's rights protest. Remember how Trump demoralized the women of the world?
Many women did not come out to vote.........even though Hillary had 2 million more votes than Trump, she lost the Electoral College. I think the main purpose of this protest was to tell women to "get off your asses and vote". If they had voted, the Oval Office would have been full of Estrogen (no Pun intended) rather than Testosterone.
|
|
|
Post by sherri on Jan 23, 2017 0:09:31 GMT
Bit silly to blame Trump for the women not voting. If women in USA don't know they have the right to vote, then nothing will help them!
|
|
|
Post by DADDY O on Jan 23, 2017 1:14:26 GMT
MEOWWWWWWWW............
|
|
|
Post by mrp on Jan 27, 2017 9:06:09 GMT
Twitter is an awful company but so is facebook.
FaceBook Fraud: by Veritasium
|
|
|
Post by DADDY O on Jan 31, 2017 5:25:35 GMT
Bit silly to blame Trump for the women not voting. If women in USA don't know they have the right to vote, then nothing will help them!
You do know that Clinton has close to 3,000,000 more votes than Trump......just in the wrong places.
|
|
|
Post by sherri on Jan 31, 2017 12:16:10 GMT
That doesn't matter at all (and yes I was aware). In every election I know of, areas are broken into electorates and not every electorate has an absolutely identical number of voters in it. The US system is a bit more skewed than it should be but that was known before the election and if it wasn't changed before then, then you just have to go along with it. Plus of course there are probably at least 3 million people who didn't vote. Instead of getting out on streets protesting or sitting in their lounges whining about things, they should have got off their backsides and voted. Don't vote, don't have a right to complain IMO.
|
|
|
Post by DADDY O on Jan 31, 2017 13:19:21 GMT
That doesn't matter at all (and yes I was aware). In every election I know of, areas are broken into electorates and not every electorate has an absolutely identical number of voters in it. The US system is a bit more skewed than it should be but that was known before the election and if it wasn't changed before then, then you just have to go along with it. Plus of course there are probably at least 3 million people who didn't vote. Instead of getting out on streets protesting or sitting in their lounges whining about things, they should have got off their backsides and voted. Don't vote, don't have a right to complain IMO.
Why do you not believe that the women in America did vote? Where did those 3 million votes come from. I wouldn't be blaming her loss on women. Think they did their job. I would instead blame her campaign manager and chief strategist......John Podesta.
|
|
|
Post by mrp on Feb 1, 2017 9:22:39 GMT
Podesta shit the bed.
That, and "I have a uterus", aren't great platforms.
|
|
|
Post by sherri on Feb 1, 2017 19:35:29 GMT
I believe the women of America probably voted as often as the men of America. Which is to say, they're all a bit slack. I wasn't meaning my comments to apply just to women, I was talking about the general adult public of USA.
The voting system and distribution is known. If there are faults, why are they not being addressed right now so there will be a more even distribution for next time? Why didn't Obama do something about it? He had 8 years in which to fix it.
|
|
|
Post by DADDY O on Feb 2, 2017 12:13:42 GMT
I believe the women of America probably voted as often as the men of America. Which is to say, they're all a bit slack. I wasn't meaning my comments to apply just to women, I was talking about the general adult public of USA. The voting system and distribution is known. If there are faults, why are they not being addressed right now so there will be a more even distribution for next time? Why didn't Obama do something about it? He had 8 years in which to fix it.
What the heck does Obama have to do with an election?
We are not a giant Socialistic system where the federal government controls everything. We are a group of States held together in Federal Laws due to the Constitution. Whatever jurisdiction is not given to the Fed's, is specifically granted to the States, like marriage, drivers licenses, and even voting.
It is the states that control elections, they want to run WHO for federal office in order to represent that state at the federal level.
Let me say this once again, because you seem to be ignoring it........It wasn't WHO voted that elected Donald Trump, it was WHERE they voted. Trump took key "Rust Belt" states that Hillary thought she would naturally win, and thus chose not to campaign in them.......therefore giving the MAGORITY of the popular vote to her (by 3 million votes), and the Electoral Votes to Trump.
Her campaign manager is such a stooge..............he never saw it coming.............Trump did
|
|
|
Post by sherri on Feb 2, 2017 15:27:01 GMT
I do understand that winning areas is important. It is the same here. And that a party may get more total votes but still lose an election.
We have the house of reps, but the idea that every person's vote has equal weight in an election doesn't stand up here either, especially with preferential voting.
It is not uncommon to see a party which may have received the most votes in an area will still lose out to another candidate who receives second preference votes.
In order for Australia to have federation happen, we also had to have a system (our senate) where states had equal representation even though they did not necessarily have equal numbers. The smaller states were not willing to join up otherwise as they felt they would be swamped by the bigger states of NSW & Vic.
The Senate has 76 Senators - 12 are elected for each of the 6 states, and 2 each for the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory. State Senators are elected for 6 year terms, territory Senators for 3 year terms.
Historically, the Senate has been regarded as a State's House: the States enjoy equal representation in the Senate, regardless of their population, and State matters are still important to Senators.
All I am saying is all politicians in USA know the system, if they think it is broken, then fix it. Work together and fix it. You may be a number of states, we are too, but some things can still be done at a federal level and working out how to run a federal election is one of them.
|
|
|
Post by DADDY O on Feb 3, 2017 14:03:55 GMT
The election system is fine here. Hillary's campaign manager just needs to understand how it works, which apparently he did not........hence H-Loss; T-Win.
I guess he never watched "West Wing"?
|
|
|
Post by sherri on Feb 3, 2017 21:42:22 GMT
Yes, politicians have to understand how the system works. Over here it would be possible (though unlikely) for a leader to lose his seat yet his party to be elected. So to transpose it to an American equivalent, it would have been possible for Republican party to win the election but for Trump personally not to have won his vote in his own electorate area. If that happened, the party would be in power but would have to choose one of their elected members to be Pres or PM.
Several years back, we had a serving PM lose his seat in an election but his party also lost. Usually parties put their leaders into what are considered safe seats so obviously there had been a big swing in that election.
In USA, if people are overall happy with how the election details work, then they need to stop acting shocked or outraged that Hilary received more votes yet isn't the pres. It's not as if Trump is to blame for the system. Love him or hate him, I think he is doing one thing that politicians don't always do and that is so far, keeping to his election promises.
I would say he is not at all a diplomat or the usual run of politician, he is a businessman so he's in for the hard sell and blunt words.
|
|