How to shut down people who complain about Hillary winning the most votes.

The best way is just to laugh in their face.

 

That seems to be your interpretation of my words, but not what I said.
I'm also a proponent of tax reform, but by repealing the 16th amendment.
Probably so, unless Congress starts to work with Trump.
Let's hope so, four years isn't enough to turn things around even with the help of Congress.

 

I have a feeling it he might not even have four years. His lies keep piling up.

 

Maybe he's more of a politician than we thought?

 

This is sweet. If Hillary getting the most popular votes makes Trump's presidency illegitimate, what does that make Obama's nomination?

 

But you have a huge flaw in your argument - that there some form of "projection". You are simply making a false argument to justify what you don't like.

 

Really? Well, Dudley Do-Right, lets have the names of the members who are guilty of your charges (radical racist right wing fascist fringe). Or are you just a keyboard ***hat?

 

Gee, what do those numbers and letters mean after the popular vote you posted? Could they mean they include the State of Mi where when the date of the primary was changed all the candidates dropped out except Hillary and so the DNC didn't count it in the popular vote? Why yes, yes it does. And didn't Obama win the official DNC popular vote that excluded MI? Why yes, yes he did, 17,535,458 to 17,493,836.

 

Trump got the majority of votes in more states in the union than did Clinton. It's called winning.

 

literally just proved this wrong.

which made sense in 1790's. It's outdated and a travesty of democracy, to have a president holding office against the will of the American people.

 

Rules prevent me from giving you a list. OTOH, it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure it out from the content of people's posts and the expression of their beliefs.

But thanks for the Dudley allusion. guess you didn't notice he always got his man.

 

There is very much a divide between midwestern and coastal cultures and economic situations in our country today. Trump successfully exploited the system and won over the Midwest despite his own origins and past expressed views. Is this a bad thing? Maybe, but only because it's Trump who did this.

Democrats, up your game. Get in touch with flyover country. Don't be a clueless party of coastal elites as you were in 2016 and largely still are.

 

IMO, one of the things the Dems failed to do was to differentiate what the significant difference between Dems and Reps on economic policy on behalf of middle class working people.

I don't know how many times I saw folks post that there was no difference between Rep and Dems on policies towards middle class or poorer folk, because they were equally in the bag for the rich.

This is absolutely false, as the Dems have a long and easily documented background of pushing for policies to help working middle/poorer folks. But this message was not communicated.

Furthermore donald was able to exploit this issue by appealing to the baser instincts of people, by scapegoating and vilifying minority immigrants, blaming a minority group for causing Americans' problems. This tactic can be very successful following a weak economy, as Hitler's Nazi demonstrated so effectively almost a century ago.

They end result is that many middle/class working folk felt the Dems weren't fighting for them, and donald would.

It's all based on lies, of course. But the Dems did not effectively counter the con man.

 

I'm not sure the Democrats have ever put their money where their mouth is, either. Just what are they doing for the working class? 0bamacare was not working class-friendly.

 

It wasn't the Republicans who promoted raising the minimum wage, passing health care reform, raising taxes on millionaires, cutting FICA taxes, promoting unions representation, expanding unemployment benefits, or regulating business. It was Democrats.

It was the Democrats, not the Republicans, that wanted to raise taxes on high income earners.
It was the Democrats, not the Republicans, that wanted to raise investment taxes.
It was the Democrats, not the Republicans, that wanted to raise estate taxes.
It was the Democrats, not the Republicans, that reformed the health care system to provide coverage to millions of Americans that didn't have it.
It was the Democrats, not the Republicans, that wanted to start Govt projects to get more people employed.
It was the Democrats, not the Republicans, that wanted to cut FICA taxes.
It was the Democrats, not the Republicans, that wanted to extend unemployment benefits for those who lost jobs in the GR.
It was the Democrats, not the Republicans, that passed regulations to reign in the big banks.
It was the Democrats, not the Republicans, that wanted to expand student loan rates, forgiveness, income based repayment.
It was the Democrats, not the Republicans, that required employers to disclose anti-union activities.
It was the Democrats, not the Republicans, that expanded overtime coverage.

It was the Republicans, not the Democrats, that wanted to cut income taxes mostly benefiting the richest.
It was the Republicans, not the Democrats, that wanted to eliminate estate taxes.
It was the Republicans, not the Democrats, that wanted to reduce or eliminate investment taxes.
It was the Republicans, not the Democrats, that have blocked all stimulus proposals and locked spending to actually decrease over a four year period, unprecedented in modern history.
It was the Republicans, not the Democrats, that wanted to cut unemployment benefits.
It was the Republicans, not the Democrats, that tightened bankruptcy rules so folks had a harder time extinguish debt, including student loans.
It was the Republicans, not Democrats, that reduced consumer protection laws.

I don't agree with that. 20 million more Americans were able to get health care coverage that didn't have it before.

Though that number is falling since donald took office.

 

Raising taxes on the wealthy does not necessary help anyone, including the working class. That may even harm us, ultimately, as higher taxes are an expense that employers and sellers will pass along. Piss trickling down, essentially.

Some of these things are vague, such as starting government projects to employ more people. No idea what projects we're talking about here. Given how bad the situation has been for many in flyover country, I suspect that they haven't received much benefit from such projects, but I would love to learn otherwise and be shown wrong on this point.

I don't take the claim about getting "millions" of people health care who were previously without it at face value. I think that this is a fudged, overblown number (by, for example, counting people who had insurance previously but signed up anyway) used for Democratic campaigning more than a substantive reality. My experience with 0-care has merely been a new "choice" of either paying an exorbitant premium for crap insurance coverage with a massive deductible or pay a new tax/penalty that gets larger every year and gives me nothing in return. In fact, I'll bet 0-care benefited the poorest of the poor more than the working class in particular, since the working class may not qualify for the subsidies.

Reining in big banks also sounds vague and does not tell me how the working class benefited. All I know is that interest on my student loan debt is still high and I still don't have a debt forgiveness option. I've also seen a lot of crap credit card offers and other loan shark-type predatory mailings of late.

Did the Democrats not succeed in getting FICA taxes cut? What stopped that? Seems like a simple enough thing to accomplish, but then, maybe it wasn't doable due to current related expenses?

 

...it doesn't matter Because, the Electoral College proclaimed our chief magistrate of the Union.

 

in the opinion of the some on the left; "our girl picked a bad time to try to go Capitalist". Their guy, is simply better at it, with all of his practice and high numbers.

 

This seems to work quite well, I trialled it the other night

 

It depends on whether you prefer a popular vote or an electoral vote, which rewards small rural states.

Personally I don't care. Hillary lost because she rain an incompetent campaign.

 

Sorry, but Trump is winning, winning,winning. THAT is what bothers you.

 

As I recall, Trump was referring to the violence, bullying and threats of violence coming from the left. Maybe not the wisest counsel, but understandable considering the circumstances and conduct of Clinton supporters.

 

Each state is a contest. Trump received the majority of votes in a majority of states. Which gave him the majority of electoral votes and the overall victory. Who cares if more people liked Hillary. It doesn't change anything just because the losing team scored a lot of points in one game in a series of games. Nor does it matter that more people rooted for the losing team. It is not a popularity contest.

 

I'd like to add that every proposed extension of unemployment benefits passed nearly unanimously. The preceding debate was always how to budget it, not whether or not the benefit was necessary. And President Bush signed two or three of those extensions into law.

 

How to shut down people who complain about Hillary winning the most votes.

"Read the Constitution"