swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,277
|
Post by swamp on Aug 5, 2019 13:48:31 GMT -5
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,000
|
Post by Tennesseer on Aug 5, 2019 14:41:00 GMT -5
Good read. Thanks. I expect we will still see more come next year.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Aug 6, 2019 13:19:50 GMT -5
Just want to point out the article was written in 2015. I think we are well past paid crowd payments for Trump. I think it is safe to say Trump does attract a crowd. Or at least enough to have actually win the election. And if, as he claims Trump packed rallies with paid people, let's now ignore all claims how all his followers at the rallies are racists, because evidently they were not really there, because they only came to be paid. Trump's crowds were in the thousands and sometimes tens of thousands. Hillary was in the hundreds many times where the camera angle always stayed focused on close ups of Hillary so you did not see how small her crowds were, and many times they were union people who were assigned to appear in in the crowds. Now waiting for Tennesseer to post pictures of hundreds of Hillary's rallies showing tens of thousands of faithful followers to disprove me.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,806
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 6, 2019 13:49:03 GMT -5
Just want to point out the article was written in 2015. I think we are well past paid crowd payments for Trump. I think it is safe to say Trump does attract a crowd. so do Monster Truck Rallies, NFL games, and urban car and train accidents.
|
|
kadee79
Senior Associate
S.W. Ga., zone 8b, out in the boonies!
Joined: Mar 30, 2011 15:12:55 GMT -5
Posts: 10,792
|
Post by kadee79 on Aug 6, 2019 14:40:25 GMT -5
And from someone who has been involved for years in the political scene...she's in her 80's & still going strong...she says this has been done for years by many from both sides of the aisle & is still practiced today. She refuses to go to any events of a politician that has a habit of doing it. Also said she was not at all surprised that DT did it and very likely continues to do it...especially the ones that holler the chants to get other started. I'm wondering if that car load of African Americans driving past the cameras...holding the sign saying "Blacks for Trump" were paid...that would be interesting to know & how much!
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,000
|
Post by Tennesseer on Aug 6, 2019 17:49:12 GMT -5
Just want to point out the article was written in 2015. I think we are well past paid crowd payments for Trump.I think it is safe to say Trump does attract a crowd. Or at least enough to have actually win the election. And if, as he claims Trump packed rallies with paid people, let's now ignore all claims how all his followers at the rallies are racists, because evidently they were not really there, because they only came to be paid. Trump's crowds were in the thousands and sometimes tens of thousands. Hillary was in the hundreds many times where the camera angle always stayed focused on close ups of Hillary so you did not see how small her crowds were, and many times they were union people who were assigned to appear in in the crowds. Now waiting for Tennesseer to post pictures of hundreds of Hillary's rallies showing tens of thousands of faithful followers to disprove me. Though the article is dated 2015 the opening paragraphs does make mention of paid actors cheering trump the day he announced his candidacy. trump needed paid actors. And we know crowd sizes have been greatly exaggerated at trump rallies by an enlightened poster. Grossly exaggerated in fact.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,000
|
Post by Tennesseer on Aug 6, 2019 17:57:11 GMT -5
Just want to point out the article was written in 2015. I think we are well past paid crowd payments for Trump. I think it is safe to say Trump does attract a crowd. Or at least enough to have actually win the election. And if, as he claims Trump packed rallies with paid people, let's now ignore all claims how all his followers at the rallies are racists, because evidently they were not really there, because they only came to be paid. Trump's crowds were in the thousands and sometimes tens of thousands. Hillary was in the hundreds many times where the camera angle always stayed focused on close ups of Hillary so you did not see how small her crowds were, and many times they were union people who were assigned to appear in in the crowds. Now waiting for Tennesseer to post pictures of hundreds of Hillary's rallies showing tens of thousands of faithful followers to disprove me. And not to disappoint you. A Hillary rally. Hillary also beat trump in the popular vote by over 3 million votes. The Electoral College has got to go. Second presidential election stolen from the Democratic party in 16 years. An enlightened poster claimed trump would win all 50 states in 2016. trump didn't.
|
|
ednkris
Well-Known Member
Joined: Feb 7, 2016 9:11:03 GMT -5
Posts: 1,176
|
Post by ednkris on Aug 6, 2019 18:04:05 GMT -5
Just want to point out the article was written in 2015. I think we are well past paid crowd payments for Trump. I think it is safe to say Trump does attract a crowd. Or at least enough to have actually win the election. And if, as he claims Trump packed rallies with paid people, let's now ignore all claims how all his followers at the rallies are racists, because evidently they were not really there, because they only came to be paid. Trump's crowds were in the thousands and sometimes tens of thousands. Hillary was in the hundreds many times where the camera angle always stayed focused on close ups of Hillary so you did not see how small her crowds were, and many times they were union people who were assigned to appear in in the crowds. Now waiting for Tennesseer to post pictures of hundreds of Hillary's rallies showing tens of thousands of faithful followers to disprove me. And not to disappoint you. A Hillary rally. Hillary also beat trump in the popular vote by over 3 million votes. The Electoral College has got to go. Second presidential election stolen from the Democratic party in 16 years. An enlightened poster claimed trump would win all 50 states in 2016. trump didn't. And yet still Trump beat Hillary in ohio by nearly 450000 votes maybe this photo was fake like all the news then lol
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,806
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 6, 2019 18:11:44 GMT -5
Clinton beat Trump by 3M votes nationwide, so maybe all his photos were fake, too. note: I don't think any of the photos are fake, but all photos are shot from a perspective- usually one which tells the story that the journalist wants to tell. the shots of Trumps rallies reflect that. I have no doubt that Clinton's did, too.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,000
|
Post by Tennesseer on Aug 6, 2019 18:19:34 GMT -5
And not to disappoint you. A Hillary rally. Hillary also beat trump in the popular vote by over 3 million votes. The Electoral College has got to go. Second presidential election stolen from the Democratic party in 16 years. An enlightened poster claimed trump would win all 50 states in 2016. trump didn't. And yet still Trump beat Hillary in ohio by nearly 450000 votes maybe this photo was fake like all the news then lol And if the presidential election was ruled with the candidate with the most votes like every other type of public election in the United States, Hillary would be president. lol.
|
|
ednkris
Well-Known Member
Joined: Feb 7, 2016 9:11:03 GMT -5
Posts: 1,176
|
Post by ednkris on Aug 7, 2019 19:43:12 GMT -5
And yet still Trump beat Hillary in ohio by nearly 450000 votes maybe this photo was fake like all the news then lol And if the presidential election was ruled with the candidate with the most votes like every other type of public election in the United States, Hillary would be president. lol. and how long have we had the electoral college? Sounds like crying sour grapes when your candidate don't get electred
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,000
|
Post by Tennesseer on Aug 7, 2019 19:44:20 GMT -5
And if the presidential election was ruled with the candidate with the most votes like every other type of public election in the United States, Hillary would be president. lol. and how long have we had the electoral college? Sounds like crying sour grapes when your candidate don't get electred lol
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,806
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 7, 2019 19:54:07 GMT -5
And if the presidential election was ruled with the candidate with the most votes like every other type of public election in the United States, Hillary would be president. lol. and how long have we had the electoral college? about 100 years too long, in my opinion.
|
|
ednkris
Well-Known Member
Joined: Feb 7, 2016 9:11:03 GMT -5
Posts: 1,176
|
Post by ednkris on Aug 7, 2019 19:55:56 GMT -5
and how long have we had the electoral college? about 100 years too long, in my opinion. but why should a few large states dictate over the smaller states?
|
|
kadee79
Senior Associate
S.W. Ga., zone 8b, out in the boonies!
Joined: Mar 30, 2011 15:12:55 GMT -5
Posts: 10,792
|
Post by kadee79 on Aug 7, 2019 20:03:29 GMT -5
but why should a few large states dictate over the smaller states? Because majority should rule....you know, like it was set up in their first place....not letting the minority have a free hand like they do presently.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,806
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 7, 2019 20:04:30 GMT -5
about 100 years too long, in my opinion. but why should a few large states dictate over the smaller states? let's not exaggerate. it is 11 states. that is not a few. that is roughly a dozen, or 1/4 of the US.
so, rephrasing your question: why should 1/4 of the states control the outcome of the election?
because they have over 1/2 of the population, that is why.
that is how Democracy is supposed to work.
why do you think that Wyoming voters should get 3.6x the vote that I do?
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Aug 7, 2019 21:55:47 GMT -5
Let's give points for land mass, since many of the Western State, have lower populations but are subject to a bunch of political whims.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Aug 7, 2019 22:37:38 GMT -5
And yet still Trump beat Hillary in ohio by nearly 450000 votes maybe this photo was fake like all the news then lol And if the presidential election was ruled with the candidate with the most votes like every other type of public election in the United States, Hillary would be president. lol. you got squat. She knew the rules-Electoral College counts. In fact I assume you knew the rules, but now I am thinking this surprised you.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Aug 7, 2019 22:39:43 GMT -5
but why should a few large states dictate over the smaller states? let's not exaggerate. it is 11 states. that is not a few. that is roughly a dozen, or 1/4 of the US.
so, rephrasing your question: why should 1/4 of the states control the outcome of the election?
because they have over 1/2 of the population, that is why.
that is how Democracy is supposed to work.
why do you think that Wyoming voters should get 3.6x the vote that I do?
You are beginning to disappoint me. I thought you knew we were a Republic. P.S. I imagine those Wyoming voters are pretty smart. Do I need to tell you why?
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,090
|
Post by tallguy on Aug 7, 2019 22:45:27 GMT -5
let's not exaggerate. it is 11 states. that is not a few. that is roughly a dozen, or 1/4 of the US.
so, rephrasing your question: why should 1/4 of the states control the outcome of the election?
because they have over 1/2 of the population, that is why.
that is how Democracy is supposed to work.
why do you think that Wyoming voters should get 3.6x the vote that I do?
You are beginning to disappoint me. I thought you knew we were a Republic. P.S. I imagine those Wyoming voters are pretty smart. Do I need to tell you why? Your explanation will be wrong, but sure, go ahead. We need a good laugh.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,000
|
Post by Tennesseer on Aug 7, 2019 23:27:20 GMT -5
And if the presidential election was ruled with the candidate with the most votes like every other type of public election in the United States, Hillary would be president. lol. you got squat. She knew the rules-Electoral College counts. In fact I assume you knew the rules, but now I am thinking this surprised you. What the fuck are you rambling on about. Of course Hillary knew the rules. I knew the rules. Why even you know the rules. What I said was only the only election election in the country which doesn't elect the candidate with the most votes like every other state, city, community, PTA, and everything else election is the presidential election. You cannot even read a simple sentence and understand what was was written. lol.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,806
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 8, 2019 0:12:48 GMT -5
let's not exaggerate. it is 11 states. that is not a few. that is roughly a dozen, or 1/4 of the US.
so, rephrasing your question: why should 1/4 of the states control the outcome of the election?
because they have over 1/2 of the population, that is why.
that is how Democracy is supposed to work.
why do you think that Wyoming voters should get 3.6x the vote that I do?
You are beginning to disappoint me. I thought you knew we were a Republic. P.S. I imagine those Wyoming voters are pretty smart. Do I need to tell you why? ed and I were having a discussion, not you and i. and no, I don't need you to tell me anything. least of all your "disappointment".
|
|
ednkris
Well-Known Member
Joined: Feb 7, 2016 9:11:03 GMT -5
Posts: 1,176
|
Post by ednkris on Aug 9, 2019 10:33:11 GMT -5
but why should a few large states dictate over the smaller states? let's not exaggerate. it is 11 states. that is not a few. that is roughly a dozen, or 1/4 of the US.
so, rephrasing your question: why should 1/4 of the states control the outcome of the election?
because they have over 1/2 of the population, that is why.
that is how Democracy is supposed to work.
why do you think that Wyoming voters should get 3.6x the vote that I do?
Sorry but that is wrong. According to that logic only those 11 states should have the right to vote. The electoral collage makes it fair
|
|
ednkris
Well-Known Member
Joined: Feb 7, 2016 9:11:03 GMT -5
Posts: 1,176
|
Post by ednkris on Aug 9, 2019 10:38:58 GMT -5
but why should a few large states dictate over the smaller states? Because majority should rule....you know, like it was set up in their first place....not letting the minority have a free hand like they do presently. And i guess everyone vote does count only those large states.
|
|
Gardening Grandma
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:39:46 GMT -5
Posts: 17,962
|
Post by Gardening Grandma on Aug 9, 2019 10:42:26 GMT -5
let's not exaggerate. it is 11 states. that is not a few. that is roughly a dozen, or 1/4 of the US.
so, rephrasing your question: why should 1/4 of the states control the outcome of the election?
because they have over 1/2 of the population, that is why.
that is how Democracy is supposed to work.
why do you think that Wyoming voters should get 3.6x the vote that I do?
Sorry but that is wrong. According to that logic only those 11 states should have the right to vote. The electoral collage makes it fair What about the electoral college makes it fair that the vote of a Wyoming voter counts over three times as much as that of a California voter?
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,090
|
Post by tallguy on Aug 9, 2019 10:44:10 GMT -5
Are you being intentionally obtuse? Were there no electoral college, every person's vote would count the same. As ONE vote. Large states have more influence because, surprise, they have more voters. That is not unfair to voters in small states. STATES should not be electing presidents. PEOPLE should. VOTERS should, and every person's vote should be equal.
|
|
ednkris
Well-Known Member
Joined: Feb 7, 2016 9:11:03 GMT -5
Posts: 1,176
|
Post by ednkris on Aug 9, 2019 10:48:28 GMT -5
Sorry but that is wrong. According to that logic only those 11 states should have the right to vote. The electoral collage makes it fair What about the electoral college makes it fair that the vote of a Wyoming voter counts over three times as much as that of a California voter? should be a lot higher. Wyoming under 600k california 39 million. Yea they should get 3.5 times.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,090
|
Post by tallguy on Aug 9, 2019 10:52:13 GMT -5
What about the electoral college makes it fair that the vote of a Wyoming voter counts over three times as much as that of a California voter? should be a lot higher. Wyoming under 600k california 39 million. Yea they should get 3.5 times. What the hell are you talking about? Do you even understand the argument?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,806
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 9, 2019 11:01:45 GMT -5
let's not exaggerate. it is 11 states. that is not a few. that is roughly a dozen, or 1/4 of the US.
so, rephrasing your question: why should 1/4 of the states control the outcome of the election?
because they have over 1/2 of the population, that is why.
that is how Democracy is supposed to work.
why do you think that Wyoming voters should get 3.6x the vote that I do?
Sorry but that is wrong. According to that logic only those 11 states should have the right to vote. The electoral collage makes it fair it's electoral college. though I do like that typo quite a bit. and according to your logic, the votes of the majority don't matter. that isn't fair.
|
|
kadee79
Senior Associate
S.W. Ga., zone 8b, out in the boonies!
Joined: Mar 30, 2011 15:12:55 GMT -5
Posts: 10,792
|
Post by kadee79 on Aug 9, 2019 11:04:09 GMT -5
Sorry but that is wrong. According to that logic only those 11 states should have the right to vote. The electoral collage makes it fair it's electoral college. though I do like that typo quite a bit. and according to your logic, the votes of the majority don't matter. that isn't fair. They don't want "fair", they can't win if things are 'fair'!
|
|