A moral dilemma
Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None |
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| Skids wrote: | The popular vote argument is weak, due to Clinton's huge margin of victory in one state — California — where she got a whopping 4.3 million more votes than Trump.
Turnout at this election was 60.0% of eligible voters, up from 58.6% in 2012. This seems low, but we are talking about eligible voters, not registered or enrolled voters. Peter Brent says 82% of eligible Australians cast a formal vote at the recent Federal election, and this is under compulsory voting. |
At the level of the popular vote, it does not matter what state they are in, Skids. That's the point. Let's face it, he represents a cry of rage from people who are suffering the costs of globalization, and a cry of rage against the dynasticism and nepotism which saw Hillary Clinton as the best candidate to run against him. That doesn't negate the fact that he's a stinker of a President - pretty clearly the most unfit man ever to hold that important office.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
 |
think positive 
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Great episode! Hell they are all great! Love George!
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
