Jump to content


Photo

The Break It Vote


  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

#21 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,065 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 12 November 2016 - 04:26 PM

 

Mr Jamieson,

 

Actually sir, I do not need to be chastised about the way that US Presidents are elected. Going back to the first presidential election I voted in, 1968, the candidate I voted for won, with 301 electoral votes, however he did not win in Texas, where I voted. So, although voting for the loser in Texas, my choice became the winner. And, as mentioned, I don't recall indicating the Electoral College was illegal, and was only discussing certain facts that are somewhat relevant. I have other things as well that I had wanted to illustrate and read comments and/or opinions on, but I see now it would be a waste of time. But, I do wonder, as I wander, why so much anger? As mentioned above, it was you who wished to illustrate how the equation was drastically changed by removing California from the mix. Was it simply because of a wide margin for HRC? If so, why not pick smaller states that together had similar margins of victory for DJT, with a similar electoral vote count overall total? No need to answer. Have a great day!

 

 

Pardon me, Mark, I feel the need to jump in here. 

 

Larry, nobody is chastising you and Mark did not express anger. Thus your comments are mystifying.


  • Mark Jamieson likes this

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#22 Mark Jamieson

Mark Jamieson

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 86 posts
  • LocationWashington State

Posted 12 November 2016 - 04:33 PM

 

 

Mr Jamieson,

 

Actually sir, I do not need to be chastised about the way that US Presidents are elected. Going back to the first presidential election I voted in, 1968, the candidate I voted for won, with 301 electoral votes, however he did not win in Texas, where I voted. So, although voting for the loser in Texas, my choice became the winner. And, as mentioned, I don't recall indicating the Electoral College was illegal, and was only discussing certain facts that are somewhat relevant. I have other things as well that I had wanted to illustrate and read comments and/or opinions on, but I see now it would be a waste of time. But, I do wonder, as I wander, why so much anger? As mentioned above, it was you who wished to illustrate how the equation was drastically changed by removing California from the mix. Was it simply because of a wide margin for HRC? If so, why not pick smaller states that together had similar margins of victory for DJT, with a similar electoral vote count overall total? No need to answer. Have a great day!

 

Since we've graduated to formality, Mr. Trotter, I will reply likewise.

 

Sir, I never said that you said the Electoral College was "illegal," but you most certain implied that it is illegitimate and violates the will of the majority.  If you feel "chastised" by the facts of the matter, I will not offer any apology.  Your responses betray your lack of understanding/approval of the Electoral College.

 

"As mentioned above, it was you who wished to illustrate how the equation was drastically changed by removing California from the mix. Was it simply because of a wide margin for HRC?"

 

Had you simply read my post for understanding, rather than for reply, you would have noticed the reason I chose California - because it is the most populous state.  Go back and reread my posts from the beginning.

 

Anger, Mr. Trotter?  From whom?  Your false charge of anger does not strengthen your position.  I am certainly not angry, as are the supporters of the losing candidate.  I'm not throwing a temper tantrum, nor am I questioning 240 years of history because of a perceived wrong.

 

And since we are on the subject of the majority not getting their way, where were the protests from you or others in 2008 when HRC had 17,857,501 popular votes in the Democratic Party primary to BHO's 17,584,692?  Where was the outcry, outrage, anarchy, and rioting when she won the popular vote but lost the nomination?


  • Greg Burnham likes this

#23 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,065 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 12 November 2016 - 04:50 PM

The double standard is simply stunning.

 

Self respect dictates that I accept the outcome of a fairly conducted election even when it does not go my way.

 

Indeed, had my candidate in any election lost to a candidate who is easily disqualified by virtue of her having violated laws, repeatedly, I still would have conceded her victory based on my respect for our Constitutional system.

 

I would not have liked the outcome, but I would have accepted it.

 

Any arguments I would have ventured to challenge her victory would have contained actual substance based in the law rather than being based on objecting to the foundation upon which our electoral process is built.


  • Mark Jamieson likes this

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#24 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,065 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 12 November 2016 - 05:03 PM

As I said in a previous post:

 

Clinton lost the POPULAR VOTE in 59% of the states.

 

Bottom line: States Rights Matter.


  • Mark Jamieson likes this

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#25 Larry Trotter

Larry Trotter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 277 posts
  • LocationHouston, TX

Posted 12 November 2016 - 05:28 PM

Mr Burnham, 

 

The US Citizen comment was an attempt to add a little humor, since I understand that you live there. And, I don't recall ever saying the Electoral College was not legal, but just a reminder that the popular vote indicated a difference in preference for the next US President. But, why would it be correct to remove any state from the equation? I picked two states won by DJT that together represented a similar electoral vote count total as California, to illustrate how the popular vote count could be adjusted by picking certain states. I did not spend a lot of time comparing numbers, but I believe that by picking and choosing, the removal of certain states that together could represent a similar population and/or electoral vote total, can alter the popular vote perspective. It was Mr Jamieson, not I, that wanted to illustrate what changes in popular vote count occurred by removing a large voter state that was won by HRC. Have a great afternoon!

 

Mr Jamieson,

 

Actually sir, I do not need to be chastised about the way that US Presidents are elected. Going back to the first presidential election I voted in, 1968, the candidate I voted for won, with 301 electoral votes, however he did not win in Texas, where I voted. So, although voting for the loser in Texas, my choice became the winner. And, as mentioned, I don't recall indicating the Electoral College was illegal, and was only discussing certain facts that are somewhat relevant. I have other things as well that I had wanted to illustrate and read comments and/or opinions on, but I see now it would be a waste of time. But, I do wonder, as I wander, why so much anger? As mentioned above, it was you who wished to illustrate how the equation was drastically changed by removing California from the mix. Was it simply because of a wide margin for HRC? If so, why not pick smaller states that together had similar margins of victory for DJT, with a similar electoral vote count overall total? No need to answer. Have a great day!

 

I stand by my thoughts as posted. And so it goes, on 11/12/2016.


Larry

Student of Assassination Research


#26 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,065 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 12 November 2016 - 05:38 PM

One of the most disappointing revelations I have witnessed occurred during the House investigations into the Clinton email server. Not a SINGLE democrat acknowledged that it was a serious offense. It was originally brushed off as nothing at all. Later, it was brushed off as an innocuous mistake. Again, not a single democrat came out against the practice in a meaningful way nor did any of them object to the obvious attempts at obstruction of justice and lying under oath to Congress. Not one. Yet we KNOW for certain that she lied to Congress because we have it on film and we also have the FBI Director categorically stating that she told the FBI stories completely different from what she told Congress. If she did not lie to the FBI, which would have been a federal offense even when not under oath, then she necessarily lied to Congress, as it cannot be both ways. In either event, lying to the FBI or lying to Congress, she actively participated in obstructing justice and perjury. This isn't even in question.

 

When Nixon's White House and the Committee to Reelect the President (CREEP) were being investigated during the Watergate hearings, it was very encouraging to note that some of then President Nixon's most loyal Republican supporters were horrified, incensed, indignant, and absolutely determined to forget political party loyalty in favor of pursuing the truth and justice. Many of them were just as, if not more, determined than their democrat counter parts. Republican Senator Howard Baker comes to mind. He was undaunted by the White House stonewalling tactics, asking at one point--and insisting on an answer: "What did the President know and when did he know it?" He put country before party. Kudos.

 

I am neither a practicing Democrat nor Republican. I have voted for candidates in both parties. So I am not picking on Democrats here. I am making an observation.

 

Indeed, even after so many articles of evidence have revealed that the DNC showed favoritism toward Clinton over Bernie Sanders by cheating during the primaries, her supporters were not outraged. Bernie's were, but not hers. Her supporters should have called her out for such behavior and should not have nominated her to begin with. If they had done the right thing, Sanders may have even defeated Trump, for better or worse, but at least it would have been more honest.

 

Power corrupts. Absolute power has corrupted absolutely.

 

My prediction is that President Obama offers her a blanket pardon before he leaves office. For the sake of justice, he really shouldn't do it. But he probably will, as if his legacy hasn't already been tarnished enough. 


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#27 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,065 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 12 November 2016 - 11:26 PM

Larry,

 

Let me give this one last try. If presidents were elected by popular vote without an electoral college the candidates running for office would never campaign in suburban or rural areas because that's not where the voter concentration is. As a result they would have no need to pay attention to the needs of those Americans and they would make no campaign promises addressing those needs. In such a situation, there literally is nothing for the new president to be held accountable for because no promises were made to those "forgotten" citizens and, subsequently, no solutions were even attempted.

 

States without a densely populated urban city would be unheard. Candidates would spend all of their time making campaign promises to the citizens who live in the most densely populated areas in California, New York, Florida, Texas, Pennsylvania and other large metropolitan areas. They would have no need to even listen to the concerns of the vast populations outside of the concentrated urban centers in America's largest cities or from those in America's heartland. And states like Hawaii and Alaska would be completely disenfranchised, as would Maine, Rhode Island, and Delaware to name just a few.

 

The electoral college, at least in theory, attempts to force the candidates running for office to be responsive to ALL Americans no matter in which state, city or town they live.


  • Mark Jamieson likes this

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#28 Mark Jamieson

Mark Jamieson

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 86 posts
  • LocationWashington State

Posted 13 November 2016 - 12:24 AM

I stand by my thoughts as posted. And so it goes, on 11/12/2016.

 

And I, sir, stand by the facts and by history.  



#29 Mark Jamieson

Mark Jamieson

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 86 posts
  • LocationWashington State

Posted 13 November 2016 - 01:12 AM

Pardon me, Mark, I feel the need to jump in here. 

 

Larry, nobody is chastising you and Mark did not express anger. Thus your comments are mystifying.

 

Thank you, Greg.  Truly frustrating… 



#30 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,065 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 13 November 2016 - 10:35 AM

Thank you, Greg.  Truly frustrating… 

 

You're welcome, Mark. That "Mr. Trotter" has resorted to assigning--or perhaps projecting--phantom emotions onto his debate rivals is the hallmark of intellectual dishonesty. This is truly disappointing behavior coming from someone who claimed to invite discussion with knowledgeable people.


  • Mark Jamieson likes this

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#31 Larry Trotter

Larry Trotter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 277 posts
  • LocationHouston, TX

Posted 13 November 2016 - 01:17 PM

Mr Burnham, this being your forum, you have the luxury to say what you wish, but accusations made against me on this thread lack justification, in my opinion. On this thread, we were having a polite conversion about the popular vote, and that issue's conversation was basically over at post number 6. Then along comes Mr Jamieson with his numbers illustration showing a different popular vote winner by removing one state, California. He stated that would make the popular winner DJT, by about 2,000,000. All I did then was remove Texas and Ohio's vote count that reduced the margin by about 666,000. I only did so to illustrate that the popular count margin could be reduced and/or eliminated by picking and choosing states popular vote numbers, similar in size and electoral votes, for removal. It went downhill from there. And, I still detect anger in posts made by the opposing point of view. But I do wish that each criticism by yourself be explained by showing my complete post, along with any complete posts I was responding to, and then a piece by piece breakdown for your accusations/criticisms.Without a thorough accounting, I do not see where I made statements that were untrue or unfounded. I am sure Mr Jamieson will jump in also, so a doubling can occur. But I am no stranger to that. Being "ganged up" on is nothing new to any escapee from Houston's near northside. In any event, without a complete and thorough review of the entire conversation, it is my belief that your criticisms/accusations lack merit. I repeat, without a complete and thorough review of the entire conversation, it is my belief that your criticisms/accusations lack merit.

 

 

 


Larry

Student of Assassination Research


#32 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,065 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 13 November 2016 - 01:53 PM

Did you even grasp the following? If not, there appears to be no hope of this conversation being productive.

 

If presidents were elected by popular vote without an electoral college the candidates running for office would never campaign in suburban or rural areas because that's not where the voter concentration is. As a result they would have no need to pay attention to the needs of those Americans and they would make no campaign promises addressing those needs. In such a situation, there literally is nothing for the new president to be held accountable for because no promises were made to those "forgotten" citizens and, subsequently, no solutions were even attempted.

 

States without a densely populated urban city would be unheard. Candidates would spend all of their time making campaign promises to the citizens who live in the most densely populated areas in California, New York, Florida, Texas, Pennsylvania and other large metropolitan areas. They would have no need to even listen to the concerns of the vast populations outside of the concentrated urban centers in America's largest cities or from those in America's heartland. And states like Hawaii and Alaska would be completely disenfranchised, as would Maine, Rhode Island, and Delaware to name just a few.

 

The electoral college, at least in theory, attempts to force the candidates running for office to be responsive to ALL Americans no matter in which state, city or town they live.


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#33 Larry Trotter

Larry Trotter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 277 posts
  • LocationHouston, TX

Posted 13 November 2016 - 02:04 PM

Mr Burnham, it astounds me how this conversation reached to where it is, although I believe the reason is apparent. But, to discontinue it is a good idea, and the closing of the thread without any additional comments would be appreciated, at least by myself.


Larry

Student of Assassination Research


#34 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,065 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 13 November 2016 - 02:11 PM

Mr Burnham, it astounds me how this conversation reached to where it is, although I believe the reason is apparent. But, to discontinue it is a good idea, and the closing of the thread without any additional comments would be appreciated, at least by myself.

 

I hate to inform you that you don't have the standing to decide to censor this conversation simply because you cannot defend your position.

 

I ask again, did you grasp what I wrote above? If so, do you acknowledge the wisdom of the electoral college concept? If not, can you explain why?

 

You are free, of course, to discontinue yourself from this thread, but you should not expect me to let you off the hook by closing the topic.

 

Get real.


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#35 Larry Trotter

Larry Trotter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 277 posts
  • LocationHouston, TX

Posted 13 November 2016 - 02:37 PM

Mr Burnham, this being your forum, you have the luxury to say what you wish, but accusations made against me on this thread lack justification, in my opinion. On this thread, we were having a polite conversion about the popular vote, and that issue's conversation was basically over at post number 6. Then along comes Mr Jamieson with his numbers illustration showing a different popular vote winner by removing one state, California. He stated that would make the popular winner DJT, by about 2,000,000. All I did then was remove Texas and Ohio's vote count that reduced the margin by about 666,000. I only did so to illustrate that the popular count margin could be reduced and/or eliminated by picking and choosing states popular vote numbers, similar in size and electoral votes, for removal. It went downhill from there. And, I still detect anger in posts made by the opposing point of view. But I do wish that each criticism by yourself be explained by showing my complete post, along with any complete posts I was responding to, and then a piece by piece breakdown for your accusations/criticisms.Without a thorough accounting, I do not see where I made statements that were untrue or unfounded. I am sure Mr Jamieson will jump in also, so a doubling can occur. But I am no stranger to that. Being "ganged up" on is nothing new to any escapee from Houston's near northside. In any event, without a complete and thorough review of the entire conversation, it is my belief that your criticisms/accusations lack merit. I repeat, without a complete and thorough review of the entire conversation, it is my belief that your criticisms/accusations lack merit.

 

Mr Burnham, I have responded with this quoted post that you seem to wish to ignore. And, I am aware of "my standing", and I am confident I am done here. But, the real fair and honest thing to do is close the thread. That way, the discussion discontinues in a fair manner for all concerned. In any event, without my requested complete and thorough review of the entire conversation and criticisms totally explained, I see no need to continue this conversation. But, for the record, keep up the good fight, it will always be appreciated.


Larry

Student of Assassination Research


#36 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,065 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 13 November 2016 - 03:07 PM

Mr. Trotter,

 

First, since this is my forum, I literally read EVERY SINGLE WORD of EVERY SINGLE POST on the entire forum. And although it was unnecessary, I accommodated your request and read the entire thread again. It has not changed my position.

 

You spoke of "accusations" being leveled against you in the thread. Let's go back to the first one, which was, in fact, leveled by you against Mark. You claimed, falsely, that he chastised you, and then you asked a disingenuous question when you said, "Why so much anger?"

 

Mr. Trotter, you crossed the "accusations" line and it was inappropriate and completely untrue. There was no anger expressed in any of his posts.

 

Please copy and paste Mark's alleged "angry" comments to prove me wrong. That you want to paint yourself as a victim of some type of persecution is sad, indeed.

 

I thought you had more self respect than that. I thought that you would engage in a reasonable discussion/debate of the facts, make your case in a cogent manner, and listen to the opposing arguments with an open mind. Where you disagreed, I thought you would at least attempt to offer a persuasive rebuttal.

 

Rather, you have ignored the arguments made by me, for one, and haven't even attempted to rebut what I have written. Instead you have called for the discussion to end so that you can retreat into the "safe space" between your own two ears.

 

While this forum is a "flame free zone" it is not a "safe space" where discussion that challenges a person to think critically is discouraged. This forum, even when it is uncomfortable to do so, accommodates lively debate and does not seek to avoid confrontation.

 

Our founding fathers valued freedom of speech; it is the first item within the Bill of Rights.

 

You would have me shut down freedom of speech in this topic thread because you appear to be unable or unwilling to defend your position regarding the electoral college.

 

For the record, my criticism of your approach lies in the fact that you appear to be resisting the outcome of the election because you fail to appreciate the importance of the electoral college in a Democratic Republic, such as, the United States.

 

A pity.


  • Mark Jamieson likes this

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#37 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,065 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 15 November 2016 - 10:35 AM

In an attempt to be fair to Mr. Trotter, I was remiss in my responsibility to insist that we all stay on topic. This thread that I started had nothing to do with the legitimacy of the Electoral College. I should not have allowed it to be derailed.   

 

Now back to the topic of this thread: The Break It Vote

 



_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#38 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,065 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 16 November 2016 - 05:39 PM

I am a firm supporter of the First Amendment to the US Constitution, Freedom of Speech, as well as the Freedom to Assemble (peacefully) in protest.

 

Yet I fail to see what exactly the protesters are protesting.

 

They appear to be protesting the election's outcome.

 

That would mean they are either protesting the will of the people or our electoral system, namely, a democratic republic--or both.

 

But, let's be clear: they are not protesting Trump.

 

He has NOT yet been elected. Technically, the election for president will take place when the members of the electoral college cast their votes on December 19th.

 

He hasn't sent a bill to congress. He hasn't vetoed a bill from congress. He hasn't signed or rescinded a single executive order. He has deported no one.

 

He has not done anything yet.

 

So the protesters--even in their allegedly heart felt sincerity--are not protesting Trump, irrespective of their claims. 

 

Perhaps the protesters are protesting his personality. It can't be his policies as he hasn't offered any post campaign season.

 

The US Constitution does not allow for an invalidation of an election result based on detractors' disdain for the personality of the President-elect.

 

So what are the protesters hoping to accomplish by these acts?

 

Most, if not all, of the protests that have evolved into riots are taking place within cities in states where Clinton won, not Trump!

 

The destruction of property, disruption of business and livelihoods, and the threat to the safety of citizens is taking place against persons who voted for the candidate that the rioters supported!

 

I support the right to protest.

 

I do not support stupidity.


  • Mark Jamieson likes this

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#39 Chuck Barlow

Chuck Barlow

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 181 posts
  • LocationFort Worth TX

Posted 17 November 2016 - 10:57 AM

My mother was born in1908 and grew up in Pennsylvania coal country and she and her family barely scraped by during the great depression. My dad was a blue collar steel worker at Baltimore's Bethlehem Steel Company's shipyard. To say I was raised hearing the praises of FDR and the benefits of New Deal economics would be an understatement. I was advised "Democrats are the party of the working people and Republicans just look out for the benefit of the wealthy people, so never vote for them". I pretty much believed them and voted Democratic over the years except when Ross Perot ran, I voted for him. I believed him when he said if NAFTA was enacted there would be a great sucking sound of our manufacturing jobs heading south.

 

I was surprised when the NAFTA agreement was supported and signed by Clinton. That was my 1st inkling that there was becoming less and less real difference between the 2 parties. I remember having discussions with my more conservative co-workers where I expressed dismay at the loss of our manufacturing base. Their enlightened view was "We don't need those types of jobs anyway". I remember commercials with guys in hard hats saying stupid shit like "We gotta compete in the global economy!" I wondered how, by dropping our pay to $3.00/hr with no benefits? As I saw warfare as a fairly constant state no matter which party had the whitehouse, my opinion firmed up that the difference between Republicans and Democrats was largely window dressing on inconsequential matters.

 

Donald Trump drew my attention when I saw that he was being attacked by entrenched republican leaders almost as viciously as liberal democrats. I started to listen to his speeches. Yes he stuck his foot in his mouth on more than a few occasions, but damn he didn't try tp hide or sugarcoat his opinions. What a refreshing difference ,to not hide behind meaningless politically correct nonsense.

 

 

Example: 

 

This youtube shows that Trump knows exactly what he is up against. He's awake and aware and we'll see if it was just hyperbolic rhetoric or if he's really sincere about fighting the corruption. If he is sincere, then I worrry about him being murdered like JFK was because Trump is up against the same Military/Industrial/Global Banker crowd. Charles has opined that JFK was selected to offer hope to the people ,just so he could be used as fodder to shock and traumatize the populace. I hope that isn't what this Trump election is all about.


  • Greg Burnham and Mark Jamieson like this

#40 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,065 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 17 November 2016 - 02:02 PM

Well said, Chuck.

 

I agree wholeheartedly. I, too, was "raised" democrat. My mother, a child of the depression, had an affection for FDR and the party as a whole.

 

My earliest personal political memories involve JFK and RFK. But, like you, I realized that the line between the parties began to blur long ago.

 

It was refreshing to see Trump attacked by BOTH sides of the aisle. Because both sides of the aisle suck.

 

I very much hope that his political incorrectness is more an indication of his unwillingness to genuflect before the political elites rather than an indication of his true temperament.

 

In my opinion, there are 3 Donald Trumps. One is a kind, gentle family man. One is a shrewd business man. One is a celebrity.

 

He became "the celebrity" personality during the campaign in order to dominate the news cycle and compete with Clinton's well oiled political machine.

 

It was the only way to compete with it. If you are in a fist fight with someone who fights dirty, you better not fight clean if you expect to prevail.

 

Now, in the Oval Office, I expect his policies will be based on the morals of a family man who loves America.

 

However, in order to get the agenda implemented we will see a very capable business-minded CEO, who is a shrewd negotiator.


  • Chuck Barlow and Mark Jamieson like this

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Web Work by: XmasZen.com