By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - Live Updates for 2016 USA Election

 

Who are you voting for?

Hillary Clinton 167 27.93%
 
Donald Trump 185 30.94%
 
Gary Johnson 23 3.85%
 
Jill Stein 21 3.51%
 
Can't vote not old enough 11 1.84%
 
Can't vote out of country 191 31.94%
 
Total:598
Slimebeast said:
Zkuq said:

Ah, I think I see your point now. I kind of agree with you, and at the same time I don't. It's not nice when it's against your opinion, but I think media has the responsibility to not just mindlessly report everything they learn. Media have the right to express opinions as well. One such opinion is that the people voted incorrectly, if that opinion is given a reasonable explanation. It can be done reasonably, but if it gets out of hand, it's obviously bad. I haven't personally noticed things getting out of hand, but then again, I have chosen to follow only media that reports things fairly reasonably. Your experience could well be different.

EDIT: I noticed your edit after posting this, but I got it already! Not initially, but for this post I did. ^^

About media's role, I obviously don't see it black and white, that their only role is to just mindlessly report what happens lol. There's different roles, even different parties or other interests who stand behind different media outlets, and even within a media outlet they usually organize it in a certain way where subjective opinion may be expressed in one place while "mindless reporting" is expressed in another.

It's a huge discussion and there's no room for it here, but in short; I am not happy about the role and behaviour of mainstream media in general.

I have to say that I really agree with you here in general. I suspect there's details we strongly disagree about, but on a general level, we probably have a lot in common in this. A media reform of some sort would be great, and a societal reform would also be great. Sadly it seems like the current system has the least issues, at least as far as I know, but I'd certainly love getting some huge improvements.



Around the Network

Since CGI locked my thread...

Did Hollywood Predict Trump's Presidency???

Watch the end to find out.



Nymeria said:
Vote Totals for Two Major Party Candidates in Recent Elections

2000
George W. Bush - 50,456,062
Albert Gore - 50,996,582

Total - 101,452,644

2004
George W. Bush - 62,039,073
John Kerry - 59,027,478

Total - 121,066,551

2008
Barack Obama - 69,456,897
John McCain - 59,934,814

Total - 129,391,711

2012
Barack Obama - 65,446,032
Mitt Romney - 60,589,084

Total - 126,035,116

2016 (99% of votes counted)
Donald Trump - 59,218,283
Hillary Clinton - 59,405,663

Total - 118,623,946

He got less votes than Romney and McCain and she still lost hahahaha, this is what you get for rigging the premaries



Bet reminder: I bet with Tboned51 that Splatoon won't reach the 1 million shipped mark by the end of 2015. I win if he loses and I lose if I lost.

chapset said:
Nymeria said:
Vote Totals for Two Major Party Candidates in Recent Elections

2000
George W. Bush - 50,456,062
Albert Gore - 50,996,582

Total - 101,452,644

2004
George W. Bush - 62,039,073
John Kerry - 59,027,478

Total - 121,066,551

2008
Barack Obama - 69,456,897
John McCain - 59,934,814

Total - 129,391,711

2012
Barack Obama - 65,446,032
Mitt Romney - 60,589,084

Total - 126,035,116

2016 (99% of votes counted)
Donald Trump - 59,218,283
Hillary Clinton - 59,405,663

Total - 118,623,946

He got less votes than Romney and McCain and she still lost hahahaha, this is what you get for rigging the premaries

Nail on head.

People are disillusioned with the system believing it's fixed. On this backdrop, the primaries are... fixed. This information hits the public domain. Is it any wonder the number of votes in this election dropped?!

That said, I am really gutted that this was not the breakthrough year for the independents. It could have easily been so different. Maybe this will be the wake up call and at the next election people might be motivated.



RIP Dad 25/11/51 - 13/12/13. You will be missed but never forgotten.

Thank you Murica, almost a year of free and intense entertainment. It will be long before I get interested in anything like Bernie, Hillary, Trump, leaked emails, biased media, etc

I can't believe I called someone an idiot for daring to think about voting for Trump in this very website, TRUMP IS A RACIST OMG HOW DARE YOU. I've grown up and grown to understand his supporters, and let's admit, he's charming in his away little (hands) way



Around the Network
MikeRox said:
chapset said:

He got less votes than Romney and McCain and she still lost hahahaha, this is what you get for rigging the premaries

Nail on head.

People are disillusioned with the system believing it's fixed. On this backdrop, the primaries are... fixed. This information hits the public domain. Is it any wonder the number of votes in this election dropped?!

That said, I am really gutted that this was not the breakthrough year for the independents. It could have easily been so different. Maybe this will be the wake up call and at the next election people might be motivated.

The problem with the 3rd parties is they just don't have a grasp on how to make use of the new means of promotion and lack the resources to contend in the conventional means.  Independents face the same issue.  Basically, the only people who can run as independents with much hope are people like Trump, Buffet, Gates, basically those with the wealth to self-fund their campaigns.  Thing is, the majority of those people have no desire whatsoever to be President :P

I do hope either a third party or independent makes a major move next election.  Having two overwhelmingly dominant parties is not healthy.



And always remember, if Trump is bad, it's only for 4 years..... and no, that's not your consolation. Your consolation is knowing that if brexist is bad, well... they dun goofed harder than you ever could.



LurkerJ said:
And always remember, if Trump is bad, it's only for 4 years..... and no, that's not your consolation. Your consolation is knowing that if brexist is bad, well... they dun goofed harder than you ever could.

He could well get a second term, you know. He ought to have a pretty good chance if he doesn't do terribly, and if he does, he's just going to blame others.



Zkuq said:
LurkerJ said:
And always remember, if Trump is bad, it's only for 4 years..... and no, that's not your consolation. Your consolation is knowing that if brexist is bad, well... they dun goofed harder than you ever could.

He could well get a second term, you know. He ought to have a pretty good chance if he doesn't do terribly, and if he does, he's just going to blame others.

As you can see from the numbers of voters above, he could've been beaten. Next time, just choose a better candidate to go against him:

"She was the Democratic candidate because it was her turn and because a Clinton victory would have moved every Democrat in Washington up a notch. Whether or not she would win was always a secondary matter, something that was taken for granted. Had winning been the party’s number one concern, several more suitable candidates were ready to go. There was Joe Biden, with his powerful plainspoken style, and there was Bernie Sanders, an inspiring and largely scandal-free figure. Each of them would probably have beaten Trump, but neither of them would really have served the interests of the party insiders.

And so Democratic leaders made Hillary their candidate even though they knew about her closeness to the banks, her fondness for war, and her unique vulnerability on the trade issue – each of which Trump exploited to the fullest. They chose Hillary even though they knew about her private email server. They chose her even though some of those who studied the Clinton Foundation suspected it was a sketchy proposition.

To try to put over such a nominee while screaming that the Republican is a rightwing monster is to court disbelief. If Trump is a fascist, as liberals often said, Democrats should have put in their strongest player to stop him, not a party hack they’d chosen because it was her turn. Choosing her indicated either that Democrats didn’t mean what they said about Trump’s riskiness, that their opportunism took precedence over the country’s well-being, or maybe both."



LurkerJ said:
Zkuq said:

He could well get a second term, you know. He ought to have a pretty good chance if he doesn't do terribly, and if he does, he's just going to blame others.

As you can see from the numbers of voters above, he could've been beaten. Next time, just choose a better candidate to go against him:

"She was the Democratic candidate because it was her turn and because a Clinton victory would have moved every Democrat in Washington up a notch. Whether or not she would win was always a secondary matter, something that was taken for granted. Had winning been the party’s number one concern, several more suitable candidates were ready to go. There was Joe Biden, with his powerful plainspoken style, and there was Bernie Sanders, an inspiring and largely scandal-free figure. Each of them would probably have beaten Trump, but neither of them would really have served the interests of the party insiders.

And so Democratic leaders made Hillary their candidate even though they knew about her closeness to the banks, her fondness for war, and her unique vulnerability on the trade issue – each of which Trump exploited to the fullest. They chose Hillary even though they knew about her private email server. They chose her even though some of those who studied the Clinton Foundation suspected it was a sketchy proposition.

To try to put over such a nominee while screaming that the Republican is a rightwing monster is to court disbelief. If Trump is a fascist, as liberals often said, Democrats should have put in their strongest player to stop him, not a party hack they’d chosen because it was her turn. Choosing her indicated either that Democrats didn’t mean what they said about Trump’s riskiness, that their opportunism took precedence over the country’s well-being, or maybe both."

Even without that, Trump may not even run for a second term.  He's pretty old.