Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)
Comments
-
Join Date:Posts: 34601
He is the 45th President of the United States of America, I dont know why you call him a CEO.
He had an election manifesto, won the election and is now implementing those promises, with some promises already delivered on .
His style, in a very brief description which does not do justice to all the nuances of the role, is as Presidential candidate and now President is to make promises and outline his policys to the American people, get voters to support him and the GOP candidates because of these promises and policy and then move those policys thru the machine that is the US triumvarate.
Voters have an option to decide on Nov 6th if they support their President or not in all of the above.
It couldnt be simpler.
Gotcha, so you didn't actually read my post, and are sticking to press release semantics so you can make snide putdowns towards me instead of debating. Why you seem allergic to even the notion of discussing the man and his psychology is beyond me.
I call him a CEO, because he spent the majority of his working life as CEO of his own company. Or Chairman, whatever his official title was - it's kinda immaterial to the point.
This leadership style during this period is, while not public record, pretty well documented - if not boasted about my the man himself. No details, just orders and pronouncements. Like a monarch might do. I asked for a better synonym, but you seem to prefer to make more personal remarks.
Do you think this style of leading, this method of running things, was just abandoned the moment he was sworn in. Especially, as I outlined, this psychology was on clear display during the healthcare bill? Historically, he doesn't appear to lead in the Steve Jobs mould.0 -
No.
If you're going to resort to personal insults and denigration of my work then I don't see the point in continuing.
I have marched in the pride parades, I am all for gay rights, trans rights, and so on. I have worked under numerous LGBT managers and directors, there are at least 2 trans people on the committee with me.
Yet you have no issues with the Trump administration overt anti-gay and anti-trans positions?I think the totalitarian liberal left anti-trump are losing it.
Quite the mouthful.0 -
I think CNN probably put it best ...
President Donald Trump's winning streak
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/06/politics/donald-trump-presidency-supreme-court-economy/index.html
CNN forgot to mention last week's revelations of his Father as a criminal and tax fraud who had to use fake companies holding non-existant assets to bail his incompetent, clueless and hapless son out on several occasions.
Also does not mention that he inherited a healthy economy from Obama but his bungling has meant that US sovereign bonds interest rates are up and are not being bought a cast iron sign that his lifetime of incompetence has not miraculously dissapeared.Theres no gimmes these days. The left liberal anti-Trumpers should have learned that lessen after 2016 when HRC blew her 'gimme' election.
The most detailed analysis of the election gives it highly probable that Trump does not get any of the swing votes he needed without Russian interference. That's before we even discuss collusion.So yep, its a major achievement for Trump and the Trump Administration, to have 2 SCOTUS appointments in less than 2 years.
Bret Kavanaugh has started his first day at work, already working a docket of cases in his new role.
Trump's incompetence almost bungled this up also by picking a man with a dodgy history of sexual assault as nominee. The nominee was so bad that the WH had to bar the FBI from interviewing him because either telling the truth or lying would finish him.And factor in the energy it has added to the GOP pre mid-terms then its been a massive month of wins and achievements for the Trump Administration.
What energy?
Latest CNN poll have Democrats with a 13-point lead over Republicans on the 2018 congressional ballot (54% to 41%) among likely voters.
MEN prefer Republicans 50-45%
WOMEN prefer Democrats 63-33%
Looks like his hating women policy has energised voters allright!
Unfortunately a large number of US women have experience of sexual assault no matter what their persuasion. Trump pivoting from calling her credible to attacking her was dumb dumb dumb. These women may forget his other lies: they wont forget their own/family members/friends sexual assault. They know Fords not lying. They now know Trump is.0 -
I did read your post ... you called him a Monarch ... and I thought that was a poor choice of words.He's a monarch.
Now your calling him a CEO ..Gotcha, so you didn't actually read my post, ....
I call him a CEO,
.
Perhaps you should take some time and figure out for yourself what your position is.
Other posters have called him the Taliban etc..
I stick by my comment , with one addition ..think the left should try to figure out some policys and strategys.
Calling the GOP some kind of Taliban or monarchy or CEO is not going to win any votes or convince anyone of anything.0 -
Rigolo, you don't have a position. You have simply stated that the man lives up to his promises, which of course is demonstrably false as he totally failed to repeal and replace Obamacare which was his top priority remember, day 1 and all that. He hasn't even worked out how to build the wall, never mind how to get Mexico to pay for it. And last time I looked HC was still at large, despite clearly his supporters wanting her Locked up.
He is not saying he is a monarch, he is saying his leadership style is similar to a monarch. In that he is right, its peoples job to do what he orders regardless of the actual reality.
So even in that you are making things up. Sure you'll say play the long game, but Obamacare is here to stay, Trump has literally no plans or ideas on how to deal with it. The wall is not even part of his speeches anymore.0 -
Advertisement
-
What energy?
Latest CNN poll have Democrats with a 13-point lead over Republicans on the 2018 congressional ballot (54% to 41%) among likely voters.
MEN prefer Republicans 50-45%
WOMEN prefer Democrats 63-33%
Yep CNN asked 739 people, (people who consider themselves Likely Voters) what they thought.
If you want to pin your election hopes on the opinion of 739 people that CNN asked for who they would vote for in a GENERIC ballot, have at it.
Im happy to take the opposing view and I feel there will be no red wave in November, as Ive said for a few months now.
November 6th will reveal all , its the fun part of a functioning democracy.0 -
I did read your post ... you called him a Monarch ... and I thought that was a poor choice of words.
Now your calling him a CEO ..
Perhaps you should take some time and figure out for yourself what your position is.
Other posters have called him the Taliban etc..
I stick by my comment , with one addition ..
What do CEOs, the Taliban, and Monarchs have in common? They rule by fiat.
So you want another term ... how about Autocrat? Tyrant? Hard man? Dictator? Bully-boy?
There are plenty of those, though history and around today. Trump's another one, and he doesn't want to "do politics", he just wants everyone to jump when he says so. Unfortunately for him, and fortunately for everyone else, democracy doesn't work like that. Although the US is sliding away from democratic norms all the time.0 -
Thing is, despite insistences to the contrary, Donald Trump does not lead. Not as CEO, nor as President. Certainly not leading in the Steve Jobs mould, where the Apple CEO demanded eye-watering precision, and had a hands-on approach to the minutiae (arguably you can see the slipping standards since his death, but that's another topic). Trump preferred to simply make a pronouncement, demanded executives to sort it out so the CEO could swoop in to take the plaudits - or fire those who didn't step up to demands. Like, he literally carved a TV career out of this approach via his "You're Fired" catchphrase - this isn't particularly revelatory, or indeed, "Anti Trump". This scattershot CEO-as-King yielded results like Trump Steaks or Trump's infamous casino disasters.
Trump as President is simply continuing the only way he knows how: make the demand (of the GOP) to get it (a bill, Supreme Court pick etc.) passed through the Houses, while publicly humiliating or castigating those who cannot deliver on the demand fast enough. It just isn't in his character or preferred way of conducting business to work alongside people - or indeed with them.
Witness the borderline calamitous attempts to pass that Healthcare bill; reports at the time echoed those CEO days in his steadfast refusal to involve himself in the horse trading of whipping votes, while sitting on the sidelines carping at McConnell & the other GOP leadership. "Who knew healthcare was so complicated?" - remember those words? Donald Trump does not get his hands dirty - that's the job of his underlings. Only of course, you don't own the government so you have the John McCain's of the world refusing to kowtow to the CEO. Cue refusal to even acknowledge the senator when he dies. You don't say no to the boss.
So as to Kavaunagh? No, this is not an achievement for Trump because he literally had to pick ONE name from a list of 27 (IIRC), that was the sum total of his political involvement, at which point it fell to McConnell once more to make it work. And were the midterms not just around the corner it's entirely debatable whether Mitch would have continued pursuing an increasingly toxic pick.
Donald Trump does not lead. Donald Trump tells you what he wants, and lets others sweat the details. "Shoot them all and let God sort it out" way of leading. And with others sorting out the details, he's free to bask in the adulation of rallies (handy tax breaks there in calling them the 2020 campaign), in between record-breaking days spent golfing.
Whether that's what you want in a President is up to you - but Donald Trump is not a leader. He's a monarch.
I think he genuinely believed that he'd happened upon, really, the perfect company. One that couldn't go bankrupt no matter how much of mess you could make of it.
Can't find an article on it, but I remember reading how one of his economic advisors had to explain to him that you couldn't just start the presses & keep printing money to fix a problem.
I really believe that he thought this was the solution to any shortfalls. Rather than actually attempt to effectively manage the economy, just push through whatever policies he wants & use the fed & the mint to deal with any issues that might arise as a result.0 -
November 6th will reveal all , its the fun part of a functioning democracy.
Unfortunately the US is so far from being a functioning democracy as to be untrue.
Open gerrymandering, corporate corruption, voter surpression. The EC makes a mockery of the notion of democracy itself.
This feeling that the US is somehow the bastian of democracy is so obviously false. The very fact that in the last election the only two candidates they had were Trump and HC tells you all you need to know about how broken the system is.0 -
Rigolo, you don't have a position. You have simply stated that the man lives up to his promises, which of course is demonstrably false as he totally failed to repeal and replace Obamacare which was his top priority remember, day 1 and all that. He hasn't even worked out how to build the wall, never mind how to get Mexico to pay for it. And last time I looked HC was still at large, despite clearly his supporters wanting her Locked up.
He is not saying he is a monarch, he is saying his leadership style is similar to a monarch. In that he is right, its peoples job to do what he orders regardless of the actual reality.
So even in that you are making things up. Sure you'll say play the long game, but Obamacare is here to stay, Trump has literally no plans or ideas on how to deal with it. The wall is not even part of his speeches anymore.
He also said he would release his tax returns, and given the NYT piece last week, I can see why he's failed in that promise too0 -
Advertisement
-
There's a bunch of speculation about Haley. That Sessions gets dumped, Lindsey Graham goes to AG and Haley gets appointed as senator in SC. Another school of thought says she's ridden her luck in terms of not getting pulled into any of this administration's scandals or screw-ups and just wants to spend a couple of years cashing in on her profile before re-assessing the lie of the land after 2020.
My gut feeling is that that there's another shoe to drop but it's not necessarily to do with plane trips. Mueller is winding uo his investigation and it's a fair guess that there is a bucket of charges to be doled out upon senior Trump administration people. I reckon Haley wants to be completely unconnected to the regime when the schit hits the fan.
Not outside the realm of possibility. There aren't going to be any more fireworks from Mueller until after the midterms but there could be a deluge of s*** in store for Trump in Nov-Dec. Once Haley is free and clear of this mess I don't expect to see or hear from her again until she's inevitably mentioned as a potential R WH candidate.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 34601
I did read your post ... you called him a Monarch ... and I thought that was a poor choice of words.
Now your calling him a CEO ..
Perhaps you should take some time and figure out for yourself what your position is.
Other posters have called him the Taliban etc..
I stick by my comment , with one addition ..
Wrong. Utterly incorrect while throwing in irrelevance over other posters' wording. I was referring to his management style akin to a monarchs. Not the GOP itself. Not Trump the person. His style of leading a company, his style now seen in leading a government.
You say it's a poor choice of words, yet give no synonym that might work better - but feel righteous in name-calling and attacking me, while wilfully ignoring the point being made - and being made pretty neutrally. You're being pedantic in other words, focusing on a single word as rope to hang me.
Can you not actually see the distinction in expression here?
Once again. Donald Trump the man did not begin in January 2017; he is the culmination of his life's experiences and actions - including that time spent running his own company in a manner - a management style - well documented. This manner, is like a monarchs. "Like". 72 years old aren't famous for sudden shifts in personality, and just because he is the head of the US government doesn't guarantee a change in his methodology.
Some leaders micro-manage: see Steve Jobs.
Some leaders demand action and let others sweat the details: see Donald Trump.0 -
November 6th will reveal all , its the fun part of a functioning democracy.
A democracy whose president politicises Judicial appointments and successfully attacks the free press is not a functioning democracy.
A democracy which was sucessfully interfered with to install a president who is compromised through money laundering, criminality and god knows what else to a foreign dictator is not a functioning democracy.
Don't make a fool out of yourself by aligning with this Doh-magogue.0 -
Would Rigolo, Elm or others care to answer;
1) would you consider yourself a republican?
2) if so, were you one before Trump?0 -
Aaaaand here's where the discussion has changed from respectful debate to condescension.
I'll drop out now for a while.
Pity, this was going so well earlier. Have a good one folks.
and:Come on now, the rest of the posters in this thread to their credit have posed respectable questions without resorting to derogation.
Surely you are capable of an adult debate without resorting to namecalling and insults?
and:It may have been a respectable question, but it most certainly was not posed in a respectable manner. And this section above is nonsense.
etc.
You seem miffed that you are not being treated respectfully in responses to your posts. And I agree that all responses should be framed respectfully. However, maybe such disrespect is equally fostered by responses such as this, made by yourself to a detailed argument I made:
Apart from the insult implied in "long-winded rant", the 'below' referred to another post that included a link to an edited video of Nancy Pelosi and totally falsely described that video as a 'how- to' for democrats in "how you run a smear campaign and use the media to spread it and then you run with it". In fact, that video was a recording of Nancy Pelosi describing her view of how Republicans conduct smear campaigns, and was neither endorsed nor recommended by her as a democratic way of working. So this was yet another example of lies and mis-direction being use to twist facts and events to suit a maligning narrative. Small details, slightly twisted, can produce significant propaganda results- straight out of Propaganda 101.Read the below as it addresses perfectly your long-winded rant.
How was your post part of respectful debate? To me, a closely argued opinion based on fact was totally ignored and resulted in a very condescending reply that used so-called 'evidence' to make your case. That evidence was patently false, and had emanated from the Alex Jones Infowars realm. This is a tactic that Trump has developed himself- that of throwing out deflection, whataboutery and outright lies in order to engage 'the other side' in a deluge of mis-information which, if not challenged, gains a foothold. However, the very process of investigating the mis-information is time- consuming and deflect attention from other things that also ought to be investigated. It a tactic long used in legal circles during discovery processes- hiding a single piece of evidence among millions of irrelevant pieces and doing a 'document dump' in order to deflect and confuse.
So, forgive me if I find that your retreating to a 'snowflake' hideout because posters challenge your arguments is at best lame, when you are engaging in demeaning responses and demonstrably false statements yourself and deflecting the otherwise informative nature of the discussion.0 -
-
oscarBravo wrote: »God, you're hilarious.
It amazes me how they can be in such denial about Trump too. He is clearly anti-trans and anti-lgb. He does not believe in climate change. He believes autism is linked to vaccinations. He has difficulty accepting non-white people as Americans. He is a prolific liar. He excuses sexual assault. He is corrupt. These things are all provably true about him. Yet a Trump supporter will either deny them or try and paint them as a positive.0 -
Captain Obvious wrote: »It amazes me how they can be in such denial about Trump too. He is clearly anti-trans and anti-lgb. He does not believe in climate change. He believes autism is linked to vaccinations. He has difficulty accepting non-white people as Americans. He is a prolific liar. He excuses sexual assault. He is corrupt. These things are all provably true about him. Yet a Trump supporter will either deny them or try and paint them as a positive.
It doesn't amaze me. A phrase that constantly comes to mind where Trump supporters are concerned is: "there are none so blind as them that will not see".
It's easy to be a Trump supporter if you practice the simple art of self-deception. You simply ignore anything he says that you disagree with, and pounce on anything whatsoever you can construe as a positive. Hence posting a picture of him waving a rainbow flag, and ignoring his tweet about banning transgender people from serving in the military.
And Trump makes it easy by constantly contradicting himself. There's probably literally no position whatsoever you couldn't convince yourself that Trump supports, if you're prepared to ignore almost everything he has ever said other than whatever you've quote-mined him for.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 15048
Yep CNN asked 739 people, (people who consider themselves Likely Voters) what they thought.
If you want to pin your election hopes on the opinion of 739 people that CNN asked for who they would vote for in a GENERIC ballot, have at it.
Im happy to take the opposing view and I feel there will be no red wave in November, as Ive said for a few months now.
November 6th will reveal all , its the fun part of a functioning democracy.
Albeit a typo , for once we agree on something :-)0 -
Yep CNN asked 739 people, (people who consider themselves Likely Voters) what they thought.
If you want to pin your election hopes on the opinion of 739 people that CNN asked for who they would vote for in a GENERIC ballot, have at it.
Im happy to take the opposing view and I feel there will be no red wave in November, as Ive said for a few months now.
November 6th will reveal all , its the fun part of a functioning democracy.
The notion that the USA is a functioning democracy is risible. Over half of Americans do not even bother to vote at all. The turnout in the 2016 Presidential was 54%. The turnout in 2014 33% and while turnout go up and down a bit when you add presidential and midterms together less then half the country even votes.
Then there is the blatant gerrymandering of house districts. Voter suppression on a mass scale throughout large areas of the country. Never mind the fact that the 2 main parties rig rules at both a state and national level so there is no way any other viable parties can emerge to challenge their duopoly. Never mind the rampant corruption of what is left of the system since the flood of money began after the citizens united decision. I could go on but in short at best the US is currently an oligarchy.0 -
Advertisement
-
The notion that the USA is a functioning democracy is risible. Over half of Americans do not even bother to vote at all. The turnout in the 2016 Presidential was 54%. The turnout in 2014 33% and while turnout go up and down a bit when you add presidential and midterms together less then half the country even votes.
Then there is the blatant gerrymandering of house districts. Voter suppression on a mass scale throughout large areas of the country. Never mind the fact that the 2 main parties rig rules at both a state and national level so there is no way any other viable parties can emerge to challenge their duopoly. Never mind the rampant corruption of what is left of the system since the flood of money began after the citizens united decision. I could go on but in short at best the US is currently an oligarchy.
When you have armies of lawyers at the ballot box demanding people who look foreign prove their citizenship, it's not hard to see why voting isn't so popular. Compare that to our own polling stations where it is much more relaxed yet turnout can still be poor.0 -
The notion that the USA is a functioning democracy is risible. Over half of Americans do not even bother to vote at all. The turnout in the 2016 Presidential was 54%. The turnout in 2014 33% and while turnout go up and down a bit when you add presidential and midterms together less then half the country even votes.
Then there is the blatant gerrymandering of house districts. Voter suppression on a mass scale throughout large areas of the country. Never mind the fact that the 2 main parties rig rules at both a state and national level so there is no way any other viable parties can emerge to challenge their duopoly. Never mind the rampant corruption of what is left of the system since the flood of money began after the citizens united decision. I could go on but in short at best the US is currently an oligarchy.
1 person 1 vote
Elections of consequence every 2 years
A Triumvarate of governing bodies
Constitution and Constitutional Amendments
Bill Of Rights
Supreme Court Appeals process
the list goes on and on and much longer and of far more consequence than the items you raise
A bit of whatabouttery mentioning gerrymandering etc is sure to get some likes here, after all the darling of the left HRC lost the election ergo the system must be flawed.
Course if Hilary had won, the totalitarian liberal left would be raving about the wonders of America having elected a woman president after 8 years of the other fella and there would be barley a whimper about the percieved ills of the US electorate system.
If the US is so mal-functioning you might want to consider why so many other first world developed nations adopted their structures when they got their independance.0 -
1 person 1 vote
Elections of consequence every 2 years
A Triumvarate of governing bodies
Constitution and Constitutional Amendments
Bill Of Rights
Supreme Court Appeals process
the list goes on and on and much longer and of far more consequence than the items you raise
A bit of whatabouttery mentioning gerrymandering etc is sure to get some likes here, after all the darling of the left HRC lost the election ergo the system must be flawed.
Course if Hilary had won, the totalitarian liberal left would be raving about the wonders of America having elected a woman president after 8 years of the other fella and there would be barley a whimper about the percieved ills of the US electorate system.
If the US is so mal-functioning you might want to consider why so many other first world developed nations adopted their structures when they got their independance.
Could you name a few?0 -
1 person 1 vote
Elections of consequence every 2 years
A Triumvarate of governing bodies
Constitution and Constitutional Amendments
Bill Of Rights
Supreme Court Appeals process
the list goes on and on and much longer and of far more consequence than the items you raise
A bit of whatabouttery mentioning gerrymandering etc is sure to get some likes here, after all the darling of the left HRC lost the election ergo the system must be flawed.
Course if Hilary had won, the totalitarian liberal left would be raving about the wonders of America having elected a woman president after 8 years of the other fella and there would be barley a whimper about the percieved ills of the US electorate system.
If the US is so mal-functioning you might want to consider why so many other first world developed nations adopted their structures when they got their independance.
So you think there is nothing wrong with the electoral system in the US. Despite the fact that Trump felt it was rigged prior to the election?
And that he stated that millions had voted illegally?
And that the machines are easily hacked?
Which 1st world countries are you talking about?
1 person, 1 vote isn't even remotely true. A vote in California is significantly less valuable than a vote in Michigan. The winner takes all nature of the EC means that millions of votes get cast aside.
And even getting to vote is a complicated and political issue. Having political parties allowed to decide to amend voting regulations in a way they think will suit them best.
Elections of consequence every 2 years
A Triumvarate of governing bodies
Constitution and Constitutional Amendments
Bill Of Rights
Supreme Court Appeals process
It all sounds wonderful. In theory it sounds great. In theory the US is the greatest country in the world. But the facts don't live up to the hype.
Would the 'left' be bemoaning the system if they had won, no, but therein lies the problem with it. Neither side really cares about the system, as long as they have a chance to win it. Gerrymandering, you pass it off as whataboutery, but can you give any justifiable reason that it should take place at all in a proper functioning democracy?0 -
1 person 1 vote
Elections of consequence every 2 years
A Triumvarate of governing bodies
Constitution and Constitutional Amendments
Bill Of Rights
Supreme Court Appeals process
the list goes on and on and much longer and of far more consequence than the items you raise
A bit of whatabouttery mentioning gerrymandering etc is sure to get some likes here, after all the darling of the left HRC lost the election ergo the system must be flawed.
Course if Hilary had won, the totalitarian liberal left would be raving about the wonders of America having elected a woman president after 8 years of the other fella and there would be barley a whimper about the percieved ills of the US electorate system.
If the US is so mal-functioning you might want to consider why so many other first world developed nations adopted their structures when they got their independance.
How can someone be totalitarian and liberal?0 -
1 person 1 vote
Elections of consequence every 2 years
A Triumvarate of governing bodies
Constitution and Constitutional Amendments
Bill Of Rights
Supreme Court Appeals process
the list goes on and on and much longer and of far more consequence than the items you raise
A bit of whatabouttery mentioning gerrymandering etc is sure to get some likes here, after all the darling of the left HRC lost the election ergo the system must be flawed.
Course if Hilary had won, the totalitarian liberal left would be raving about the wonders of America having elected a woman president after 8 years of the other fella and there would be barley a whimper about the percieved ills of the US electorate system.
If the US is so mal-functioning you might want to consider why so many other first world developed nations adopted their structures when they got their independance.
Gerrymandering is rampant. Voter suppression is rampant. Voting machines are vulnerable. Trump himself said the electoral college was unfair. Trump himself said electoral fraud is rampant. Fake news is rampant. Both Russia and China appear to be able to influence elections in the US. The mere fact that a supreme court can be liberal or conservative, as you have admitted, means it is not working as intended. The US structure is good but it depends on politicians working for the good of the people and the country. It does not protect from the likes of the GOP and Trump and their self serving agendas.
One man one vote but not every man gets a vote and not every vote is worth the same.0 -
Considering recent events even mentioning a triumverate of governing bodies shows an acute irony deficiency.0
-
A bit of whatabouttery mentioning gerrymandering etc is sure to get some likes here, after all the darling of the left HRC lost the election ergo the system must be flawed.
Course if Hilary had won, the totalitarian liberal left would be raving about the wonders of America having elected a woman president after 8 years of the other fella and there would be barley a whimper about the percieved ills of the US electorate system.
If the US is so mal-functioning you might want to consider why so many other first world developed nations adopted their structures when they got their independance.
Well if you have more votes then your opponent and still lose an election then yes that system is flawed by definition.
And what do you mean by totalitarian liberal left ?0 -
Professor Moriarty wrote: »Could you name a few?
Going to answer my own question as (s)he never responds. There are no other countries that have copied America's electoral structures. Mainly because other countries think it's a terrible form of democracy.0 -
Advertisement
-
Well if you have more votes then your opponent and still lose an election then yes that system is flawed by definition.
And what do you mean by totalitarian liberal left ?
Or if you win more states than your opponent in a constitutional federal republic then you win the election, then the system is working as designed.
Perhaps someone should have given Hilary a history lesson in the structure of the United States of America, she may have spent less time flying east to west coast fund raising, and more time visiting and campaigning in the 'flyover states' .
Shes not the only person around here that needs a US history lesson.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement