Trump Elector: I Refuse To Cast My Vote For Donald Trump Because I’ve Sworn To Defend The Constitution

From his op-ed published tonight by the New York Times:

I am a Republican presidential elector, one of the 538 people asked to choose officially the president of the United States. Since the election people have asked me to change my vote based on policy disagreements with Donald J. Trump. In some cases, they cite the popular vote difference.

I do not think president-elects should be disqualified for policy disagreements. I do not think they should be disqualified because they won the Electoral College instead of the popular vote. However, now I am asked to cast a vote on Dec. 19 for someone who shows daily he is not qualified for the office.

Fifteen years ago, as a firefighter, I was part of the response to the Sept. 11 attacks against our nation. That attack and this year’s election may seem unrelated, but for me the relationship becomes clearer every day.

George W. Bush is an imperfect man, but he led us through the tragic days following the attacks. His leadership showed that America was a great nation. That was also the last time I remember the nation united. I watch Mr. Trump fail to unite America and drive a wedge between us.

Mr. Trump goes out of his way to attack the cast of “Saturday Night Live” for bias. He tweets day and night, but waited two days to offer sympathy to the Ohio State community after an attack there. He does not encourage civil discourse, but chooses to stoke fear and create outrage.

This is unacceptable. For me, America is that shining city on a hill that Ronald Reagan envisioned. It has problems. It has challenges. These can be met and overcome just as our nation overcame Sept. 11.

You’ll definitely want to hit the link for the full statement which concludes with this: “Fifteen years ago, I swore an oath to defend my country and Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. On Dec. 19, I will do it again.”

  • bkmn

    Now we just need a few dozen more of them to do the same.

    • Mark Neé Fuzz

      I’m hoping for a couple hundred. A landslide denouncement if you will.

    • david fairfield

      If only…

      • Jeffg166

        Wouldn’t it be lovely.

      • margaretpoa

        This is key because only a landslide denouncement by the college would be accepted by the American people. Clinton winning by a couple of EVs would still leave the election in limbo, while winning by a couple of hundred EVs would be a clear repudiation of Trump’s brand of whatever it is he’s doing. I don’t expect it…at all…but it would be a nice Christmas present for the country.

        • BobSF_94117

          A squeaker win by Clinton would be bad, but it is a constitutionally valid result of the process. I’m sure there would be significant violence and difficult times ahead. Fortunately a majority of the country does not support Trump. At all.

    • cheakamus

      Unfortunately, here in Washington state, we have at least one democratic elector who has announced that he will never vote for Hillary Clinton. The two will cancel each other out.

      • JT

        Amazing idiocy that got us Drumpf.

        • Bill_Perdue

          Democrats got us Trump because you’re indistinguishable from him and voters wanted neither.

          ”The latest ABC News/Washington Post tracking poll finds Hillary Clinton is seen unfavorably by 60% of likely voters in the latest results, a new high. Trump is seen unfavorably by essentially as many — 58%.
          Marking the depth of these views, 49% see Clinton “strongly” unfavorably, and 48% say the same about Trump –- unusual levels of strong sentiment.

          • Adam Schmidt

            Bill, that’s disingenuous and I’m pretty sure you know it. That’s the same kind of polls that say 60% don’t like Obamacare (I’m making that number up for the sake of the argument). What they’re not telling you is that 30% don’t like it because they are conservatives against the ACA in general and 30% don’t like it because they think we should have single payer. But people use the 60% number to suggest we should just get rid of it and go back to what we had even though that’s not what the people answering the poll believed in general.

            In your numbers, it’s saying that they both had high unfavorables but it was very different groups that looked more like a Venn diagram with a narrow slice in the middle that overlapped. Most Hillary supporters were unfavorable of Trump. Most Trump supporters were unfavorable of Hillary. Then you had the group in the middle that didn’t like either. Their reasons for disliking one or the other were however different and I doubt you’d find many who said they thought Hillary and Trump were just the same.

          • Bill_Perdue

            It’s the truth. If you don’t like the results of polls then you don’t but now you’re just attacking the messenger and that will get you nowhere.

            Democrats are indistinguishable from Republicans. Polling and the fact that 45% or so boycotted the elections bears that out.

          • Adam Schmidt

            No… I can say that I don’t like beans. I also don’t like broccoli. That doesn’t mean they’re the same. Or that my reasons for not liking them are the same. That both Hillary and Trump had similar percentages of unfavorables doesn’t make them the same either nor the reasons for people not liking them.

            That you think they’re the same, that’s your opinion. The numbers you’ve provided so far do not bear out that others feel the same way as you.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Yes, they do. And to make it even better, the numbers of those not voting is steadily increasing.

          • Adam Schmidt

            Bill, now you’re sounding like Trump. You’re saying something is true because you feel it’s true, despite numbers and facts showing that what you’re saying just isn’t the truth.

            Here are the results of a poll asking why people didn’t like one candidate or the other:

            https://morningconsult.com/trump-clinton-unpopular/

            Note: The reasons between the two were different. And also worth noting, this poll asked why voters didn’t like Hillary or Trump… not why they do or do not like Republicans or Democrats or even if they do or do not like Republicans or Democrats.

          • Bill_Perdue

            I’m sorry if you, like Trump, can’t accept the truth. That makes you irrelevant.

          • Adam Schmidt

            Now you’re just making snide attacks. I’ve provided evidence to back up my statement. You’re still working with your misinterpretation of polling data that doesn’t bear out your premise. When you can back up your assertions with something that resembles credible data, then lets talk.

          • Bill_Perdue

            I’m just describing you.

          • Adam Schmidt

            Seriously?! You’re taking the “I know you are but what am I” defense? What are you, five?

            G’night Bill. I enjoy discussing politics but not with someone that’s going to act like a child.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Thanks for nothing, troll.

          • JT

            You are vile, contemptible, lying, cowardly Nazi collaborator scum and you know it.. Your hypocritical anti-war bullshit has got you Mad Dog Mattis and your Nazi lord and master, “we have nukes to use them” Drumpf, to endanger the world. Your hypocritical faux pro-worker bullshit and mindless false equivalences have got you the American Hitler as your overlord..

          • Bill_Perdue

            loser/whiner racist who likes deportations

            That’s a very good thing.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/fa3f418bce4d3e6c74cd7c522a12342577c653926db9011cbd46f34618fbe5e0.jpg is upset again.

          • JT

            You are vile, contemptible, lying, cowardly Nazi collaborator scum and you know it.. Your hypocritical anti-war bullshit has got you Mad Dog Mattis and your Nazi lord and master, “we have nukes to use them” Drumpf, to endanger the world. Your hypocritical faux pro-worker bullshit and mindless false equivalences have got you the American Hitler as your overlord.

          • Bill_Perdue

            loser/whiner racist who likes deportations

            That’s a very good thing. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/76c57ffa3b9a67df7055dba89838440e131199090494d05b34de74d1ff9b32a9.jpg

          • JT

            You are vile, contemptible, lying, cowardly Nazi collaborator scum and you know it.. Your hypocritical anti-war bullshit has got you Mad Dog Mattis and your Nazi lord and master, “we have nukes to use them” Drumpf, to endanger the world. Your hypocritical faux pro-worker bullshit and mindless false equivalences have got you the American Hitler as your overlord.

          • Bill_Perdue

            says the loser whining racist who enjoys seeing people deported and proves it by voting for it. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a03e0f47cfa6b449730c871c0028d49802d736d8574e155e6845495ee212dc7c.jpg

          • JT

            You are vile, contemptible, lying, cowardly Nazi collaborator scum and you know it.. Your hypocritical anti-war bullshit has got you Mad Dog Mattis and your Nazi lord and master, “we have nukes to use them” Drumpf, to endanger the world. Your hypocritical faux pro-worker bullshit and mindless false equivalences have got you the American Hitler as your overlord.

          • Bill_Perdue

            loser/whiner racist who likes deportations and votes for them is upset again.

            That’s a very good thing.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/76c57ffa3b9a67df7055dba89838440e131199090494d05b34de74d1ff9b32a9.jpg

          • JT

            You are vile, contemptible, lying, cowardly Nazi collaborator scum and you know it.. Your hypocritical anti-war bullshit has got you Mad Dog Mattis and your Nazi lord and master, “we have nukes to use them” Drumpf, to endanger the world. Your hypocritical faux pro-worker bullshit and mindless false equivalences have got you the American Hitler as your overlord..

          • Bill_Perdue

            racist piglet loser has lost it (except, in truth, he never had it). https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d19a5eb2118c30ffd44449db7c267ad434c10fde15d8e9977c62843fd17eef8b.jpg

          • JT

            You are vile, contemptible, lying, cowardly Nazi collaborator scum and you know it.. Your hypocritical anti-war bullshit has got you Mad Dog Mattis and your Nazi lord and master, “we have nukes to use them” Drumpf, to endanger the world. Your hypocritical faux pro-worker bullshit and mindless false equivalences have got you the American Hitler as your overlord.

      • Dazzer

        I think that Elector is Native American. Hemight change his mind because Obama has intervened on the pipeline issue.

        Perhaps he won’t – but from what I can recall, the pipeline a had a lot to do with his decision.

      • Smartypants

        Not true. The goal is to get Trump below 271 electoral votes. At that point the election is thrown to the House of Representatives and where they must choose from among the top three electoral vote recipients. If a group of Republican electors voted for Kasich or Romney, the House could elect that person as president. It’s a long shot, but the only possible shot.

        • Kate

          The house isn’t going to give the election to someone who didn’t win a single state in the election. If Trump ends up below 270, they will just hand it to him anyway.

          • TMA

            The faithless electors are all allegedly trying to rally around Kasich as an alternative candidate. If you don’t think the Republican establishment would jettison Trump in a second to go for Kasich in the House of Representatives election, you’re out of your gourd.

          • Oikos

            Kate is a troll and not worth responding to. I blocked her.

          • Bill_Perdue

            says oikos the cowardly troll

          • NancyP

            Kasich they can deal with. Trump is uncontrollable.

          • Kate

            How is this Trump prediction different from all the other ones about how he would never be permitted to win the nomination, or the general, that he wasn’t serious, etc.?

            If it goes to the House, the House will choose him. The republicans haven’t stopped him so far, and the amount of chaos that the Trump campaign would cause if the election was handed by congress to someone who didn’t take a single state in the election would destroy the campaign.

            If you think the BLM riots are bad, you have no idea what the Trump people rioting would look like.

          • Oscarlating Wildely

            “If you think the BLM riots are bad, you have no idea what the Trump people rioting would look like.”

            Oh yes, I do: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/80/81/0f/80810f1eec7a30f73aa9879a7bd29383.jpg

      • NancyP

        Who would he vote for? Bernie? What’s the point?

    • Earl

      From your keyboard to the elector’s ears.

      May the only faithful voters vote for Clinton, along with all the other electors.

  • geoffalnutt

    Donald Trumb is, indeed, the enemy.

    • pj

      stupid is the enemy. chump is just at the head of the army

  • Todd20036

    Yup. This is not a matter of democrats being sore losers.

    Trump is not qualified to be the President.

    It’s not even a close call.

    • KnownDonorDad

      “The Constitution is rigged!”

      • BobSF_94117

        It is actually. There’s a built-in bias in favor of conservatism. The structural advantage of small states wasn’t always such a clear-cut winner for conservatives, but it certainly has been for half a century.

        • Ninja0980

          Indeed, several states such as ID,WY,SD etc.are automatic wins for Republicans, which is absurd.

      • Dazzer

        How would Trump know? It’s not like he’s ever read it. And, according to some sources, it’s not as if he can even read.

        • MusicBear88

          He can read at least 140 characters at a time or he wouldn’t be able to respond to tweets…

          • Dazzer

            He probably has a PA read stuff to him and then dictates his reply.

            The person reading and taking dictation is held up in secretarial circles as ‘The Ultimate Bad P.A.’ People leave the profession to avoid ever losing so much self-respect that they end up in that position.

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            Maybe thats why iskanka is always with him at his meetings. So she can read for him

        • (((GC)))

          A totally real, absolutely 100% valid theory, as valid as any other conspiracy theory that has inflamed the right wing:
          Donald Trump can’t read! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LFkN7QGp2c

      • Jeffg166

        The whole idea of the electoral college is to stop someone like Donald Trump.

        • Kate

          The whole idea of the electoral college is to stop states like CA and NY from dominating. The US was an alliance of states, so the Senate was created to balance the interests of the states, while the House balances the interests of the general population.

          This keeps the influence of states like California from being 66 times that of Wyoming, limiting them to 18 instead.

          • Dazzer

            Not really. It just means that a person in California or New York has a vote that means less than someone in Montana.

            It’s an absolute violation of the preamble to the Constitution that states: “all men are created equal”.

          • Kate

            All men are created equal. All states are, too. That’s the point.

            The federal government is supposed to serve the states, and the people through the states. The US is not supposed to have a strong federal government.

          • Dazzer

            Yes, and by your reasoning – and that of the Supreme Court – all corporations are human and thereby equal, too.

            It’s a nonsense argument in the 21st century.

            Your argument of States’ Rights is only applicable if the rights of states were written into the constitution as over riding central government/federal rights. There is no such codicil to to the US Constitution, soyour argument is based on what you want the Constitution to mean, rather than what it does mean.

            That’s fair enough in your argument. However, it doesn’t cut the mustard when applied to the wider reading of the actual words of the Constitution.

          • Kate

            No, corporations are not human. Corporations are creations of the state, and when they cease to serve the interests of the people, the state should stop pretending they exist. It wasn’t really the ruling of the supreme court, either, but that’s a long discussion.

            “If the rights of states were written into the constitution as overriding central government/federal rights.”

            They were.

            “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

            In other words, the federal government gets a few limited powers granted by the Constitution (note – the rights belong to the people, and the constitution grants the federal government it’s power, rather than the constitution granting the people theirs), and the rest of the powers belong to the states, or the people.

            Limited federal government, strong states. Until the 14th amendment, the constitution only applied to the federal government.

          • Dazzer

            You’re cherry-picking. That’s fair enough. If I had as weak a case as you do, I’d do exactly the same thing.

            However, you’re ignoring the caselaw that goes into the interpretation of the Constitution that’s gone through the courts and Supreme Court.

            Case law interprets the Constitution on a regular basis. If it didn’t all Americans would be wandering round with muskets , perrywinkle wigs and a tendancy to crap outdoors because the only basis for the Constitution is fixed entirely in the era in which it was first signed.

            The Courts exist to allow the USA to progress to meet new threats to the nation.

          • DaveW

            Also if it didn’t we wouldn’t
            Have a gun problem nor restrictions on reproductive health. Not an established religion with the government praying constantly etc. . Case law is often wrong and while slow the process can repair it.

            You say she’s cherry picking but you are changing the subject. Case law is not the constitution, which is what you not have we’re arguing first. It’s valid, but a diversion here. Your words “actual words of the constitution “

          • Guest

            Every corporation started out as charter corporations in our history. It was not until Lincoln, trying to win the civil war did companies gain some rights. And they have been pushing for more ever since.

          • Kate

            Exactly. The corporate death penalty needs to return. Companies are factious entities, and should have no rights at all. People and sole proprietorships, certainly, but companies should have to fulfil a public purpose in order to gain public benefits.

          • Robincho

            As your neighbors to the south are wont to say, “n’engagez pas”…

          • jsmukg

            Or, in plain English, don’t feed the ludicrous TROLLETTE.

          • DaveW

            You or I may not agree with her but she is not a troll. She engages the argument and ignores childish rebuttals like yours that attempt to silence her instead of arguing on the points

            BP simply tries to rattle someone and moves immediately to name calling. A troll. Kate? Not a troll.

            Calling everyone you disagree with a troll simply says you don’t want to engage opposing views, i.e. you are like the fox viewers. Sad.

          • jsmukg

            Incorrect on every point. KAY (not Kate–its latest sockpuppet name) has been here before, spouting the same drivel about gunz, Trump, Clinton, etc; it (not she) repeats itself endlessly in the face of complete refutal from dozens of posters here. Being a minority of one is never a particulaly strong position, particularly when it is unsupported by reason and logic. Clearly, you have bothered to read none of the refutals; I choose to summarize, not to repeat them, as virtually every intelligent poster on JMG has posted them in every conceivable way. Pathetic that you think you can comment on the situation when you have read nothing and know nothing about it.

            By the way, lovely little unregistered sockpuppet account you have there, troll.

          • Exatron

            Actually, the whole point of the constituion was to have a strong federal government. We had a weak federal government under the Articles of Confederation, and it was a disaster.

          • Kate

            That’s why the tenth amendment specifically reserved all rights not granted to the federal government to the states and the people?

          • J Ascher

            That was a fop to the southern colonies just like holding that Blacks were 3/5ths of a person was.

          • Xiao Ai

            A state is not a person. We’ve been down this road before. I believe the appropriate response would be pretty much to ignore everything that you type at this point, Mrs. Bannon.

          • DaveW

            Silence your opponent? Learn that from trump? It’s unhealthy and leads to the ignorance we have.

          • Xiao Ai

            Nice try.

          • Gayer Than Thou

            States don’t have constitutional rights.

          • Kate

            Yes, they do. Quite a few, and the tenth amendment protects them.

          • Gayer Than Thou

            Not really – the Tenth Amendment speaks of “powers,” not “rights.” It is a limit on the reach of the federal government’s power, not a grant of individual rights to states. It would be incongruous with the rest of the Bill of Rights for the Tenth Amendment to grant rights to states when the rest of those amendments are clearly about individual rights (states do not have the right to a speedy trial, or to assemble, or to confront witnesses, or to be protected from cruel and unusual punishment, or to demand a jury trial in matters in which more than $20 is in controversy, or to be protected against being tried twice for the same offense, or to be protected against incriminating themselves).

          • Kate

            To quote Jefferson,

            “Resolved, that the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government; but that by compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States and of amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for special purposes, delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force: That to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party….each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.”

            States were supposed to have rights. Those powers are how they exercise those rights.

          • J Ascher

            We tried to exist as a nation without a strong Federal government under the Articles of Confederation from 1776 to 1781 and it was a disaster. The Federal government needs to be strong enough to keep the individual states from warring with one another.

            More than that, all states entered into an indissoluble union called the United States of America.

          • Guest

            BS. I am so tired of this righty lie. We are currently under our 2nd Constitution. Our 1st Constitution was called the articles of confederation. It was replaced about 10 years in by the actual founding fathers for a much more stronger federal government.

            Let me state that again. The actual founding fathers knew early we had to have a strong federal government.

            The whole whiskey rebellion was to prove the government could tax, the government could take guns away from those who rose up, and the federal government could step inif a state was not, or even with no regard to what a state wanted.

            The fact is our government, our Constitution was all we could compromise amoung the states with individual interests. But the intent was clear. Forming a more perfect union meant the government would grow

            And the treaty of Tripoliade it clear that we were not founded as a Christian nation. The actual founding fathers voted 100℅, no disagreement and the treaty clearly states it

            It is our history, and you had damn well better know what it is before you toss out crap lies

          • Kate

            I never said it was a Christian nation. It’s absurd that a government founded on the basis of freedom from religion is somehow fundamentally religious in nature.

            The power lies in the people and the state – the “stronger” federal government of the father’s time didn’t do a fraction of the things our government does now. We’ve went way beyond in terms of feature and scope creep.

          • Guest

            You really are good at Cherry picking the righty argument. That is what they do sincerely they are wrong.

            1st you ignored the whole 2nd Constitution proof. Then you go after my other example of righty lies as if it was the main point.

            You do that all of the time, especially when the topic is guns.

          • Kate

            So, you’re complaining that I’m addressing specific points, rather than your entire comment, particularly when there are areas I know better, and ones I’m not in a position to speak as expert on?

            Ok, I’ll plead guilty to that one.

          • Guest

            Google makes it easy to read about the articles of confederation. And that proof of the founding fathers creating a stronger federal government within 10 years blows the whole righty lie up.

            Your whole argument died and yet you push unfounded beliefs.

          • DaveW

            This disagreement tells me how good the document is at balancing the tension. I see merit in both your opinions. THAts good. The guns for everyone is a travesty and a misreading. The support of religion out of fear of not allowing free expression is wrong too. States experimenting and fighting federal overeach, rights of minorities are good things.

            What is really unfortunate is your immature use of “righty”. Our society has accepted this childish name calling/silly euphemisms instead of spirited discourse. Everything is a label, left or right. It’s tribal. Grow up, you have good opinions without it!

          • Guest

            And your comment about our federal government not doing what it did then is stupid. By your logic, we should not have an air force since we did not have planes then. If the government can advance to protect the country when we had no standing army then, then the government can advance to honor the main goals of the Constitution.

            Oh, and the public square is mentioned 3 times in the document, you know the document the right says they love and the house reads at the start of the last 3 sessions, well except the parts they refuse to read and except the parts they skipped over by mistake.

            By your words, it is clear you have never read the Constitution. If you had, you would know it reads like a socialist document. It is clear that the people can make it what they want, within the framework of the majority cannot take away rights of the minority.

            And your weak and inaccurate arguments refuse to look at case law and plus 200 years of supreme Court decisions on what the Constitution means, and apply it to a current day. And the founding fathers meant for the review to ne applied to a current day. Had it not, then your love of guns would mean you could not have more than a musket. You do not get to have it both ways like Scalia did. He coined a term of original intent and applied it selectively to suit his religious and righty wants.

          • Guest

            Autocorrect. Tresty of Tripoli

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            Couple of days ago mrs kate bannon was an expert on trade, tariffs and how don the con is going to bring back manufacturing to the usa on a scale we havent seen since WW2. i suggest we all give it the good ole block and send it back to buttbart

          • Toniabbarrientes

            Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj141d:
            On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
            !mj141d:
            ➽➽
            ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash141TopDataGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!mj141d:….,…….

          • BobSF_94117

            The EC has TWO whole ideas. Your party has benefited by it for a century. Now, all of a sudden, you don’t like the EC. Hypocrite.

          • Kate

            Who said I don’t like the electoral college? I think it’s vital, and I did before the election.

            It’s also not my party. Trump is literally the only republican I have ever voted for. I’m an independent.

          • BobSF_94117

            Have you ever voted for a Democrat?

            You certainly don’t like the EC’s role in preventing dangerous people from taking the presidency.

          • Kate

            Yes, I have voted Democrat.

            I have my issues with the electoral college – specifically, that it’s not quite representative enough (though I have that problem with the house of representatives as well).

            I’d personally like to see there be more electors, and have it divided proportionally within the states. It would preserve the important role of the electoral college in providing certainty (we don’t need 50 recounts each election), in balancing the interests of small states and big states, while also increasing the representation of individuals within their states. As it stands now, blue votes in red states and red votes in blue states don’t matter unless they are enough to swing the state. I’d like to see that changed.

            As for the role of “preventing dangerous people”, I don’t see Trump as dangerous, but I do see the idea of a few hundred people deciding the election however they want as a risk. It’s a lot easier to suborn a few hundred than hundreds of thousands of votes, and the electoral college is getting death threats. That’s a very dangerous precedent.

          • j.martindale

            Honey, you are deranged.

          • zhera

            You don’t see Trump as dangerous.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Trump = Clinton.

          • Dubito et cogitare

            Kate = Bill Perdue.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Ask the moderators if that’s true, if you dare.

          • FAEN

            Dude. You voted for someone no one has ever heard of. You don’t belong in the conversation IMO. You are no better than the millions who were too moronic to vote.

          • Bill_Perdue

            You voted for a disgusting, rabid racist. You’re no better than the people who voted for that other rabid racist, Trump.

            You’re so dumb you think voting counts. That’s really dumb. It doesn’t and that scientific fact not partisan idiocy.

          • Kate

            Compared to Clinton? No, he’s the far safer candidate. He’s pushing back on damaging trade, and working to not start world war 3 by antagonizing Russia and blaming them for everything.

          • DaveW

            Sure, wall st agrees with you too. Our portfolios are soaring. Clinton would have been troubling economically, at least on taxation.

            But you talk of only some policy. I’m worried about loss of rights for minorities, selling out to religion to get support and healthcare. The budget, with unscrupulous tax cuts which yes I’ll enjoy but will hurt in the long run, too much spending on military.

            And temperament (you speak of wars????), bigotry
            In the cabinet. Bannon

            I didn’t like Clinton, it was a hard choice but sanity says you can’t support this man even if you
            Like a lot of his economic policy and want an end to
            paying for free stuff.

          • Kate

            Stocks may be up, but wall street spent a lot more money funding Hillary. She did come out against Glass-Steagall, and her “private” position to Goldman Sachs and the like was in favor of open borders, and free trade. She would have supported higher taxes, but large businesses really don’t like tariffs.

            “I’m worried about loss of rights for minorities”

            Me, too. They are some of the biggest victims of Bill and Hillary’s anti-“super predator” bills, for profit prisons, and economic exploitation. I’m worried about their ability to support their families, the hardships that come with job loss, insurance loss. The effect it has on marriages, on relationships.

            “Selling out to religion to get support and healthcare”.

            I agree on religion – it’s a deal with the devil. Healthcare isn’t working, and ObamaCare made things worse overall, and for a lot of people. I’m reserving judgement on that one – single payer was the way to go, but neither candidate was advocating that.

            “The budget, with unscrupulous tax cuts”

            Now is not the time to cut taxes. Debt is a huge issue, and normally the democrats do a better job of reducing deficits and working towards a balanced budget. “Tax and spend” can work.

            The big question is whether Hillary would be 4 more years of Bill’s spending policies (a great thing), or 4 more years of Obama’s. The later is scary. I’m fine with raising my taxes – I pay over 40% marginal rates at the moment, and will pay more if it means my children and grandchildren don’t get left with a broken economy and a huge debt.

            “Too much spending on military”

            Yes, yes, yes. Clinton’s a war hawk, and Trump wants a “more modern military”. We spend more than the next three countries combined on military – let’s cut half and still be the #1 spender by far.

            “Temperament”

            I … have reasons for not trusting Clinton’s temperament. At all. She is not nice to those who work under her, and that’s coming from friends of mine who have worked directly with her. She’s verbally (and in some cases physically) abusive, and has been since she was first lady.

            “Bigotry in the cabinet”

            Yeah, I’m not liking his cabinet picks, either.

            “Sanity says you can’t support this man even if you like a lot of his economic policy and want an end to paying for free stuff”

            It’s not about free stuff – it’s about the future of the country, and navigating the inevitable failure of capitalism as automation eliminates more and more jobs. Ultimately, we’re going to have to go basic income and single payer, but we have to get from here to there. The current economic policies have destroyed the middle class since the 80s (thanks, Reagan!), and things are getting worse. The US still holds some competitive advantage in IP, but this trend towards outsourcing and offshoring has helped bootstrap foreign countries and given China and India a significant head start on building their own technological base. It’s great for them, and a good thing for the world – we just need to make sure that we aren’t leaving Americans behind while we do it.

            At the end of the day, I believe it is the job of the US government to protect their citizens, and I don’t see Hillary being the person for that job. Trump might be, and I and roughly 50% of the voters in the US are willing to take that chance.

            We know who Hillary is – now we’re Hoping for Change.

          • BobSF_94117

            One minute you appreciate the EC’s bias to small states, the next you say you want it to be more representative.

            Bye. Again.

          • Kate

            The two are not incompatible. I want more resolution in the EC, not to abolish it’s principles. Double the number of electors for every state (which keeps the power balance), allocate proportionally.

            This means that the states still elect the president, but states that have 51% support one candidate don’t simply hand all the EVs over to that one candidate. It would need to be done as a state action, as the states get to choose how to allocate their electors.

            Basically, it would be my preference if the states allocated their electors like Maine.

          • GayOldLady

            Excuse me while I go vomit! In the meantime you might want to read this.

            http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-reason-for-the-electoral-college/

          • The_Wretched

            ewww

          • Scott

            Are you insane?

          • Bill_Perdue

            The electoral college is undemocratic. The US is not a democracy. As Gilens and Page write, ‘the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.’ In other words, their statistics say your opinion literally does not matter.” https://mic.com/articles/87719/princeton-concludes-what-kind-of-government-america-really-has-and-it-s-not-a-democracy#.JFsaGXuFO

          • Kate

            “The US is not a democracy.”

            Exactly. It’s a representative republic, deliberately set up in such a manner as to isolate the general population from direct democratic rule.

            The system has been subverted to a large degree by the moneyed elite, who overwhelmingly supported Clinton. Trump had enough wealth (and used populism enough) to permit him to overcome that bias, so in a way, he was the more “democratic” option. Most people didn’t vote for him, and most people didn’t vote for her.

          • Xiao Ai

            Define “most”. No, don’t bother. Your claim does not hold water and I’ve seen people like you continue to twist things to their own end.

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            I like u. Glad u found ur way here. Uve got a good head.

          • Bill_Perdue

            There is nothing democratic about any candidate of the D or R parties. All the leaders of the Democrat and Republican parties are oligarchs, racists, warmongers, immigrant bashers and union busters. And have been since the inception of the US.

          • GayOldLady

            But most people who voted, VOTED FOR CLINTON.

          • Kate

            Yes, most people who voted. Many of those votes were illegal, most people didn’t vote, and many conservative voters in blue states (and liberal votes in red states) didn’t bother, because it didn’t matter.

            Neither candidate tried to win the popular vote, neither strategy was based around it, and it disproportionately favors the democrats due to their high population states, but sure. Clinton won most of the votes count, including votes from non-citizens and disenfranchised felons. It means nothing, but if it makes you feel better, she won that.

            http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Do-Non-Citizens-Vote-in-US-Elections-Richman-et-al.pdf?D=1

          • Dramphooey

            There is no evidence whatsoever of “many illegal votes.” None.

          • Ninja0980

            You’re citing a right wing group that was founded to take down the Clintons as a valid source?

          • Kate

            I’m citing Jesse T. Richman, Gulshan A. Chattha, David C. Earnest from George Mason University and Old Dominion University. I can also cite the government accountability office if you’d like.

          • GayOldLady

            “Many of those votes were illegal,”

            Oh, you’re a Breitbarter!!! There is no responsible news organization on the planet that supports that assertion. You’re a Neo-Con ratfucker and you need to go.

          • Lumpy Gaga

            Oh, you’re a Breitbarter!!!

            Worse. A Klayman.

          • Kate

            “There is no responsible news organization on the planet that supports that assertion.”

            So everyone talking about voter fraud is right-wing, like the government accountability office, the federal government watchdog, judicial watch, and the public interest legal foundation?

            We know that there are a significant number of noncitizen illegally registered to vote – it’s why in some jurisdictions they have special questions for jurors to weed them out, as the jury list is selected from people registered to vote.

            http://gao.gov/new.items/d05478.pdf

            https://publicinterestlegal.org/files/Press-Release_Noncitizen-Voting-1.pdf

          • David Walker

            Good going, GOL. As soon as I read that (I’m having a bout with insomnia) it all became clear.

          • perversatile

            Oh my gawd- I was nice to him/her/it and engaged in pleasant discourse. Now I feel all dirty and not the good kind either.. I guess it’s my fault for assuming someone with such good writing skills couldn’t be a brain damaged POS. Fool me once…
            ”That which doesn’t destroy you, makes you stranger.”

          • (((GC)))

            “Many of those votes were illegal.”

            Absolutely false. There’s no evidence. Only far-right fake-news Breitbartist assertions.

            Delete your account.

          • Lumpy Gaga

            She cites Judicial Watch. Tells me what I need to know.

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            We need a go to site called Troll Watch

          • Kate

            There’s plenty of evidence. We could start with the many illegals registered to vote and caught with voter registration cards, though that more proof of registration than proof of voting.

            As for why they register, go look at the I-9 form all employees are required to complete to work. A fake social security card will pass e-Verify if the number is stolen, but they need two documents. The first is a proof of identity, the second is proof of lawful status.

            Acceptable for a identity (for an adult): Driver License (has a photo), Federal ID card (has a photo), School ID card (has a photo), Military or Military dependant card (has a photo), Coast Guard card (has a photo), tribal document (hard to get, may or may not have a photo), Canadian driver license (has a photo) … and voter registration, which does not.

            Voter registration is the lowest security option, and with register by mail you can get a genuine government-issued document that will pass eVerify. Show that and the forged SSN card (which will also pass e-Verify), and you have all you need to work in the US, and no proof you aren’t the person you claim you are. It’s great for identity theft, which happens a lot in the illegal immigrant community.

            As for the actual voting, it’s easy to do. Lots of fraud and duplicate registrations happen.

            http://ijr.com/2016/11/722025-14-cases-of-voter-fraud-so-far-this-year-and-its-not-even-election-day-yet/

            “The Public Interest Legal Foundation recently uncovered more “1,000 noncitizens who have registered to vote in just 8 of Virginia’s 133 voting jurisdictions. These ineligible voters have cast nearly 200 ballots in American elections. Each fraudulent registration and vote is a potential felony.””

          • TimCA

            The Public Interest Legal Foundation. Wow that sounds like a totally non-partisan organization…….until you read who their 6 member board of directors consist of. It’s like the who’s who list of right wing extremists ie- a writer for the National Review, a Heritage Foundation high muckety muck etc. What’s even more fun is that the other half of their board (3 members) are full on anti-gay bigots like Cleta Mitchell, John Eastman and Brian Brown.

            Pathetic that people like Kate, who self identify as gay, busy themselves shilling for gay haters.

            https://publicinterestlegal.org/about-us/board-of-directors/

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            Kate (or Kay) is about as gay as the gravel in my driveway. Its probably not even a female and maybe also not even a usa citizen

          • Bill_Perdue

            Just as pathetic are the self loathers and racists who shill for the Clintons and Obama.

            “Hillary Clinton evolved on same-sex marriage within the first 72 hours of her presidential run, as her campaign said Wednesday that the former secretary of state now backs marriage equality as a US constitutional right.
            The about-face, dropped as Clinton was preparing the second of two progressive-leaning appearances in Iowa, represents a significant – if not completely unexpected – shift from her previous statements that same-sex marriage should be legislated state-by-state rather than on the federal level.”
            http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/15/hillary-clinton-gay-marriage-presidential-campaign?CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZkK2_6H9MM

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a03e0f47cfa6b449730c871c0028d49802d736d8574e155e6845495ee212dc7c.jpg

          • zhera

            “Many of those votes were illegal”

            Aaaand that’s it. Blocked, hushed, bye bye.

          • Ninja0980

            Same here, done wasting my time on trolls.

          • zhera

            I’ll give her credit for good grammar and coherent language. That’s the only reason I didn’t block her the first time I read her comments.

            Straight up lying about the election and the Resident-Elect while claiming to be ‘independent’? Yeah, no.

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            You people are slow learners. I blocked this skank 4 days ago.

          • Bill_Perdue

            65 million or so voted for the racist H Clinton, 62 million or so voted for the racsit Trump and 95 million voted correctly – they stayed home.

          • Guest

            Another righty lie. A republic is a form of democracy.

          • TallBearNC

            Yep but it also needs to be gone. The country’s populous vote should decide who becomes president

            If it were gone, Hillary would be president elect right now

            It’s an Old arcade institution that needs to be gone

          • Kate

            “The country’s populous vote should decide who becomes president”

            That would be a complete shift of power from the states to the people.

            “If it were gone, Hillary would be president elect right now.”

            Maybe. If it were gone, Trump would have spent his time and effort campaigning in NY and CA, instead of puttering around in small states. Few people thought he would win the election, so for all you know he would have won the popular vote, too. There were a lot of people who stayed home because they though their vote didn’t matter.

          • TallBearNC

            True but I doubt he could have gotten that many MILLIONS more. In the end the EC does far more harm than good. If it elected Hillary vs trump THEN it would be doing its job properly.

          • Kate

            So the system is only good when it elects the people you want?

          • Barry S G

            Kate, so you are saying that a voter in Wyoming should have greater weight than a voter in California. I thought the ideal was one person one vote, not one person one voter or one and half votes or two votes depending on where the voter resides.

          • GayOldLady

            Well Kate believes that Wyoming, which is the least populated State with a little more than 500k citizens, should have a disproportionate impact on our Election process simply because they’re a State. So If the population of Wyoming suddenly shrinks to 3 people they still have 3 electoral votes, one for every citizen. The EC is unfair and unrepresentative of the will of the people. It’s archaic and the Constitution needs to be amended to get rid of the EC.

          • (((GC)))

            Of course it should take three and a half Californians to equal the vote of one Wyomingite! The Founding Fathers intended that all along! /s

            Actually they made that “compromise” to keep the southern slaveholding states in the union. That’s where the “3/5 of a person” rule comes in; if a state freed its slaves and they left, the state would lose representation in the House and in the Electoral College.

            https://extranewsfeed.com/3-1-2-californians-some-are-more-equal-than-others-5b5cfef6b2a3

          • Kate

            No. I’m saying that the state of California should have a higher weight than the state of Wyoming, but that the state of Wyoming should still have a say in the election.

            The president is elected by electors, who are appointed by states in the manner that they choose. The states can choose to do a popular election (as they currently do), and each voter within a state has exactly the same vote as each other voter within the state. The states use the popular opinion to inform their electors and cast the state’s votes, on behalf of the people. Some states allocate all electors, some states split the allocation.

            One person, one vote. Equal weight. Each state’s representation is based upon their population (80%), and their rights as a state (20%).

          • Jason

            And also to ensure that three-fifths of slaves were represented by someone of their masters’ choosing

          • (((GC)))

            Exactly. The Electoral College was instituted to, among other things, keep slave states happy. https://extranewsfeed.com/3-1-2-californians-some-are-more-equal-than-others-5b5cfef6b2a3

          • MonochromeMouse

            the system is broken, one citizen should get one vote regardless of what state they live in. the idea that a popular vote only election gives California and New York an advantage is stupid, it shouldn’t matter what state voted for who, it should matter how many total american citizens did, otherwise you get what happened this election and the 2000 election where the clear winner had the election stolen from them because flyover country is mostly populated by a bunch of redneck hillbillies.

          • Kate

            “one citizen should get one vote regardless of what state they live in”

            And they do. Each person has exactly the same amount of influence in their state’s electors.

            “it shouldn’t matter what state voted for who”

            Of course it should. The whole point of electors was to put the presidency in the hands of states. The constitution even limited who they could vote for – they could not vote for people from their own state, to help ensure that each state didn’t vote for their own people and the most popular state would win.

            The electors were appointed by the state, and the state is free to allocate them however it pleases. It was not, and has never been a popular election, and was not and has never been designed to do so.

            Each state gets a certain number of electors, and the electors elect the president. They balance population and statehood, so that each state has a voice, but the population still matters. Most states have chosen a winner-takes-all approach to the electors, but there is no obligation to do so.

            Technically, the democrats could pass a law that simply said all delegates went to the democratic nominee, if they could survive an equal protection challenge.

            In other words, the people don’t elect the president. The states do. States choose to have a popular vote in order to direct their electors, but they are under no obligation to do so, and the electors (as it currently stands) aren’t legally required to vote the way the people want.

          • MonochromeMouse

            That’s exactly what’s wrong with the electoral college system, It should be the people that elect the president otherwise the voting isn’t equal and some state’s (and therefore some people’s) votes matter more than others.

          • Kate

            “It should be the people that elect the president”

            Why? The president is supposed to represent the United States. All of them.

          • MonochromeMouse

            “states” are just lines on a map, an esoteric ethereal concept that only means what people at any given moment decide it means. The president represents the people.

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            If clinton had won this troll would be bitching about how the EC needs to go.

          • perversatile

            If each state has two elected senators and a number of representatives for each state based on population, how exactly does the electoral college maintain what you consider ‘fairness’?
            Why shouldn’t California’s votes count more? California’s GSP is in the trillions, from a purely ”what are you bringing to the party” point of view, don’t we admire individual who bring more than is expected? If numerical representation is equal to a level playing field, does the ‘alliance of states’ in the name of ‘fairness’ get to look at “under-performing states and say,
            “gosh the way you run things on a state level is rubbish, so you only have 1/8 of a vote this year, because we don’t need your sloppy politics from spreading beyond your state’s borders”?
            Fortunately or unfortunately it doesn’t work that way. We
            are an alliance of un-equal states made up from un-equal individuals and the Electoral College does nothing to rectify this except on the most trivial level, there are no engineered solutions for a successfully functional whole made from a collection of flawed smaller parts. If we define success based on the results of these superficial actions, our definition of success in itself is flawed.
            At this point in time the United States if functioning as the ultimate pyramid scheme, one where the people on the bottom are crushed merely to make room for more. How do the individuals operating at the top levels of this pyramid, the Electoral College actually vote? Up or down?

          • perversatile

            I’m a happy to hear criticism from our admirable collection of keen intellects here at JMG. I’m probably ranting about things I don’t know enough about, however I did suppress my urge to use the phrase, ‘capitalist hegemony’.

          • Kate

            “If each state has two elected senators and a number of representatives for each state based on population, how exactly does the electoral college maintain what you consider ‘fairness’? ”

            It balances competing interests. About 80% of the representation is based on population, and 20% is allocated equally among the states. It reflects the dual nature of the country – a federation of states, with the federal government representing the interests of both the people directly, and through their respective states. It’s inappropriate for larger states to completely dominate policy, as it’s important to protect the rights of minorities, but by the same token, we don’t want all of the power to go the other direction.

            It’s about a balance. Remember, the states gave up their sovereignty to a large degree in exchange for fair representation. The passage of time has not eliminated that bargain.

            “Why shouldn’t California’s votes count more?”

            It does. Significantly more.

            “California’s GSP is in the trillions, from a purely ”what are you bringing to the party” point of view, don’t we admire individual who bring more than is expected?”

            We don’t allocate based on the economic output – it’s population, and states. Ones contribution to society is not based on the amount of money you make. Poor people matter, too.

          • perversatile

            An excellent argument, well presented with the obvious mental acuity to back it up, and I can’t help but to appreciate this exchange even though we differ on the merit of the merit of the current functioning Electoral College and it’s questionable original intentions.
            I will not attempt to sway your opinion, your position is unassailable by such meager skills as I possess, although the pleasure is in the trying. In that spirit I would like to address your closing comment. I apologize in advance for referencing a non-secular source.
            The Torah states there will always be poor people, and we will know the nature of a society by how well the disadvantaged are treated.
            We are fortunate this not the metric by which we are currently judged, instead, our value and merit is determined by a roster of fiscal quantifiers, it is how we as individuals and as families are assessed. It is the method by which society’s injustices go unaddressed and how ‘justice’ is only for the wealthy.
            We need look no further than Donald Trump’s looming presidency to realize attributing superior abilities to someone merely by dint of accrued wealth, is not only a deeply flawed system of valuation, but an actual liability to all human life
            Poverty in the United States will rise under Trump’s regime and poor people will matter, but only because there will be so many of us.

          • Kate

            “I apologize in advance for referencing a non-secular source.”

            A source being non-secular doesn’t mean it’s wrong – it simply means that it, on it’s own, it should not be used as the basis for government. Truth should be sought wherever it can be found, and much of the wisdom of our past was passed down in oral tradition, including through religious texts.

            If something is true, we should be able to find a secular justification, as well.

            “The Torah states there will always be poor people, and we will know the nature of a society by how well the disadvantaged are treated. ”

            There is much of truth in that statement, and a government should serve it’s people – all of it’s people. Old, and young, rich and poor, religious or not. Much of our lives are a function of chance, and no matter how smart or “bootstrappy” someone is, they are only an accident or different birth away from slavery, or physical or mental handicap. Everyone is dependant when they are a child, and protecting the poor protects everyone.

            “It is the method by which society’s injustices go unaddressed and how ‘justice’ is only for the wealthy.”

            I have seen that “justice” system firsthand, and seen the difference wealth makes. It is not just.

            “We need look no further than Donald Trump’s looming presidency to realize attributing superior abilities to someone merely by dint of accrued wealth, is not only a deeply flawed system of valuation, but an actual liability to all human life. Poverty in the United States will rise under Trump’s regime and poor people will matter, but only because there will be so many of us.”

            I hope you are wrong. Were I religious, I would pray that you were.

            I do reasonably well in business. By the standards of the world, most of us are very wealthy, and by the standards of the US, I do better than most. I voted for Trump because I felt (and still do) that he was the better choice for the 99%. Not because of his business acumen, although I hope that would help, but because I believe that trade is impoverishing the middle and lower class.

            Growing up, my family was involved in manufacturing. I watched as the jobs went overseas, as the workers were laid off, as the unions were helpless to fight. I watched as other businesses were forced to close their doors, or to offshore themselves, in order to compete. I watched the damage to workers families, the cost to marriages, to healthcare. I watched as people with little retirement savings were destroyed, trying to keep a family going on money intended for their retirement while desperately trying to find a job, then settling into minimum wage work because it’s the only honest work they can find.

            I am ashamed that my parents helped push that forward, and I swore that I would not follow in their footsteps, and that I would oppose that kind of business where I could. It is not fair to ask an American worker to compete with exploitative conditions, and I will stand in opposition to that wherever I can.

            There are things I don’t like about Trump, and things I don’t like about Hillary. Had she supported protective tariffs and economic policies that genuinely help American workers, I would have supported her. Had Trump come out against tariffs, I never would have voted for him.

            I dislike his current cabinet picks “bigly”, but I will give him a chance to abide by his word. If he works to protect the workers, as he has promised to do, I will support him and campaign for him in the re-election. If he fails to do that, I will campaign against him equally hard, and I will do my best to tear down any support he has. I will fund ads against him, volunteer for his opponents, campaign on Facebook, go door-to-door, and phone bank to do everything in my power to see he’s nowhere near government.

            The funny thing is it’s not even about me. It’s about my siblings. It’s about the daughter my sister just announced, or her siblings, or cousins. It’s about their friends, their families, their parents, their cousins, their neighbours, their schoolmates, their countrymen. I voted for Trump because because for the first time in my life I heard a serious candidate for president talk about addressing the economy that has been stacked so much against the 99% for the past few decades, and I’m ready to give him a chance to try something new.

            I made the best decision I know how to make, and chose the less flawed of the two candidates, in the hope that change will come. I think it’s unfair to write him off entirely before his first day in office.

          • DaveW

            Good intentions but it’s clear you’ve been duped like so many. REAd Krugman from yesterday as example

            I do disagree with tariffs. Open trade is good if we focus on skills and innovation/productivity

            I think the workers own some blame too. Hiding behind corrupt unions instead of improving skills. “Trade” union-used to support being skilled at your trade. The guilds were more succesful at this. The unions don’t t do it at all now.

          • Kate

            I agree with you on the trade unions and guilds. It’s one of the reason I support laws making union membership optional.

            When workers voluntarily choose to organize, and employers voluntarily choose to work with them, the unions have a much higher incentive to try to provide value.

            I have friends who worked in unions that focused on skill – if you called the union, you knew that they would get someone there, the job would be done right, and on time. They policed their own, and they were able to charge a premium because of it. They kicked out the bad apples, and skill meant higher wages. The union provided for a pension, and healthcare, and helped to blacklist abusive employers in solidarity with other unions.

            On the other hand, when I worked for the airlines, I was “represented” at one point by TWU. They made sure that you couldn’t be fired for anything less than murder, and that the airline had to have way too many workers (since we weren’t supposed to work anything outside our limited assignment). Working harder didn’t get you a promotion or more pay, and you were expected to sit around for most of the day. It drove me absolutely nuts. Being right to work didn’t matter because they were regulated federally, and there was no way to decertify unions entirely – only replace one with another.

            On the other hand, Southwest had a great union, and the waiting list for hiring was over a year at the time.

            You and I are going to disagree when it comes to trade. I suspect you have been duped by those who advocate globalism, but I look forward to getting a chance to find out.

            You’re welcome to disbelieve this (and I wouldn’t blame you if you did, as it’s statistically improbable), but I gained a lot of distrust for economic theory after spending time studying it at Harvard. I question a lot of the fundamental assumptions made, starting with the “rational choice theory” (that individuals, given the choice, act in their own rational self-interest), and continuing on through the concept that we maximize utility (satisfaction) by maximizing consumption.

            For what it’s worth, I did not continue my studies, my grades were not particularly stellar, and I ultimately went a different direction in my life. I am not an expert in economics by any means, but if you want to put a screen in something and have it play video (or reverse-engineer eletronics to see how it works or extract data), I’m your gal.

            Perhaps I am wrong. Perhaps tariffs won’t work today like they did in the US in the past, or for other countries today. I, and millions like me, voted for change and an opportunity to try something new, and to learn from it’s consequences – good, and bad, just as the country learned from the changes made by Obama.

          • perversatile

            i have no doubt you well take care of the people you love and keep them safe.

          • Kate

            Thank you. I try. I speak here because I believe that all sides should be heard – I try to speak with conservatives as well, and to advocate for the positions and rights of minorities and gay people.

            If you had quoted from the Bible instead of Torah, I would have responded in kind – unfortunately, I am more familiar with Quran, Bible, and Book of Mormon. So, instead, I shall leave you with this:

            I wish you and your family the best. Genuinely. Thank you for the conversation, and the questions, and feel welcome to comment or call out inconsistencies you see. Truth in all things.

            Good night.

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            Why are u being so …….placating and kind? This is a troll. Comes on here to make waves and smugly dig in wounds. Block it

          • DaveW

            Sad. That’s just pathetic. Disagree, disengage, sure. Silence? Awful. And not a troll. Behaves exactly the opposite.

            THE worst trait of thisblog is the desire of some to be an echo chamber. That’s being a troll!

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            Differing opinions are perfectly acceptable.
            Arguing with crazies, and negotiating with nazis isnt. Its fruitless.

          • perversatile

            My mom always said, killing someone with kindness is way too much
            work because they don’t actually die.

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            LOL.

          • DaveW

            Well, the earth tilted and everything loose rolled to the left. Or as my father said, beware the land of the fruits and the nuts! Ok, /s

            I would like popular vote but I do acknowledge CA is another world that is nice to visit (north) but we in New England would hate to see that mess happen here. Every time I have to go to LA for business I just cringe. Why do they choose to live like that. I would run and fast!

          • Ziad Baaklini

            CA didn’t even exist when the electoral college was formed.”
            The vast majority of people lived in rural areas. It has nothing to do with urban centers…

          • DaveW

            That’s what they told you with a glass of kool Aid. Could not be more wrong.

            Sure, Everyone is saying it. Keep repeating and it won’t be true. (Everyone are usually wrong. You know, the 95th percentile)

            The EC was simply to protect white landowner power. That’s all. No coincidence the people they wanted to hold power from would be more and more congregated in cities and didn’t own land, which is rural by definition. See the correlation yet between truth and PR version?

          • Kate

            “The EC was simply to protect white landowner power.”

            No, it wasn’t. The electoral college serves to delegate the responsibility for electing the president to the states. It shares the same balance as congress – 20% divided equally among the states, 80% by population.

            The states choose to have a popular vote, and most allocate their electors all to the winner. They are not under an obligation to do so, nor technically are the electors legally obligated to vote that way (though they might be fined in some states if they fail to do so).

            “See the correlation yet between truth and PR version?”

            It’s not a matter of PR. It’s a matter of the United States being a union … of states. The less populous states had little desire to lose all their soverignty and representation to the populous states, for the same reason many EU member states would resist a direct popular election for EU governance. State governments themselves want representation, and not just based on the number of people in their country.

            The three fifths “compromise” was about white landowner power, but that was a separate matter entirely from the compromise struck in the senate. It affected the electoral college insofar as the representation in the house of representatives was changed, but that was by no means the point of the electoral college.

            There’s a reason we didn’t abolish the electoral college when doing the reconstruction amendments.

          • SJWinCMH

            Then why does a state like WY get over 3 times the representation as a state like CA?

          • Kate

            It doesn’t. California gets 18 times the representation. If it were purely based on population, it would be 67.

            Since the people don’t elect the president (the states do), that would be a very bad thing.

            California has their electors, Wyoming has theirs. Each state chooses to have a popular vote (though they could do it through gladitorial combat if they wanted, it’s their vote), and the electors are selected based on their intent and pledge to support that candidate.

            So, each Californian has an equal vote in what California does, and each Wyoming resident has the same for Wyoming.

            It’s just like voting for congressmen. The states send their representatives (electors and congressmen), and they vote on behalf of the people they represent. Each state has a voice, and the people do, too.

          • CottonBlimp

            The whole idea of the electoral college is to stop states like CA and NY from dominating.

            And the purpose of THAT was to keep states like CA and NY from abolishing slavery.

          • Kate

            It really wasn’t. The south wanted the slaves to count for representation purposes. It was the north that didn’t, and that wanted slaves counted as 3/5 of a person.

        • (((GC)))

          Both during his campaign, and even more now that he apparently won this questionable election, Trump has repeatedly shown that he doesn’t understand the Constitution he’ll be swearing to preserve, protect, and defend, and/or he simply doesn’t care. He is unqualified and unfit to serve.

          We can take meaningful action before the electors vote: https://electoralcollegepetition.com/take-action/take-action-now/

          • Deloriswburrell

            Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj214d:
            On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
            !mj214d:
            ➽➽
            ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash214MarketSpaceGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!mj214d:….,…..

          • saucetin

            Thanks for directing your ill-gotten lucre to worthy charities. YOURE THE BEST!

          • Toniabbarrientes

            Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj141d:
            On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
            !mj141d:
            ➽➽
            ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash141TopDataGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!mj141d:….,…….

        • DaveW

          Corect. People keep saying it was to ensure rural influence. That’s the PR reason, like chrisrianity claiming it does charity (vs it’s gullibles do charity while it teaches them to hate)

          The EC was created so white landowners could still decide the election while pretending to give that power to the people. Then creating the party system soon after was to ensure the people only had their picks to choose from

          Time for that true reason to come through!

          Read Krugman yesterday-he nails how the dumb white workers were duped. He doesn’t even hide his opinion of their intelligence anymore. The “elites” are called that for a good reason. Sadly I and my circle will be just fine. Those that did this to us will suffer the most. We may need more legal work or will pay more for private healthcare but the idiots who did this will suffer most, as always. They’ll never learn. Poor and still spending more on cigarettes than we do on good cheese.

          • NancyP

            The electoral college was one of the mechanisms of giving power to the slave states disproportionate to the number of actual (white male) voters.

    • MonochromeMouse

      If he didn’t somehow manage to sell himself as the paragon of wealthiness in pop culture decades ago he would have never even been nominated or taken the least bit seriously as a politician.

      • Bill_Perdue

        He won, however undemocratically, becasue Democrats with their racist deportations, wars of aggression (Obama has eight going on), ruthless attacks on unions and the standard of the working class and the Bill of Rights makes Democrats indistinguishable from Democrats.

        All the lying in the world can’t alter the fact that some 95 million voters refused to vote because they understand that that both parties are the same and that both parties are the enemies of workers. They vote at all or won’t vote for any Democrat or Republican. That’s a very good thing. http://heavy.com/news/2016/11/eligible-voter-turnout-for-2016-data-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-republican-democrat-popular-vote-registered-results/

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ac419b3938e9f372be370866de66905a5afb9f2b6b2fb87fc279615d37cf3ba0.jpg

        • ralphb

          And those 95 million (non)voters are assholes. What don’t they get about Trump being a clear and imminent danger to our country and the world? They may try and spin it into some kind of high handed moral stance, but it’s just flat out stupid. Talk about a dereliction of duty. Sheeeesh.

          • Kate

            Some of us consider Clinton to be a clear and imminent danger. Continuing Obama’s dangerous policies would do irreparable harm to the US and it’s people.

          • ralphb

            So Trump was the better choice? Really? You honestly think his policies will be better? Good lord….

          • Bill_Perdue

            Trump = Clinton = Bush = Obama = Reagan.

          • Kate

            Yes, he was. So far, he’s not even in office yet, and he’s killed the TPP and negotiated to bring jobs back, bringing more money to the states. He’s starting to thaw the cold (and dangerous) relations we’ve had with Russia. That’s a very good thing.

            Protect the economy, and you protect the people.

          • ralphb

            Two trolls on the thread. Piss off.

          • Bill_Perdue

            trolls are hilbots who can’t comment politically so they hide behind personal bs. Their trolling is an admission of the fact that they’e too stupid to comment politically.

          • Oikos

            I blocked that twunt.

          • ralphb

            I used to comment on this forum back when it started, but I stopped because there were too many fucking creeps involved. Looks like it’s the same old same old. This is not discussion, it’s yelling at each other and coming up with the best insult.
            Joe really needs to get his shit together and dispose of the obvious trolls.

          • Oikos

            Use disqus blocking and make them irelevant. Trolls thrive on attention. If they are ignored they go elsewhere.

          • ralphb

            I belong to a music forum where the most egregious offenders are banned. It’s called keeping your house in order.

          • Oikos

            Joe does ban some of them but they can easily create new trolling accounts.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Then just go.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Then you’d be gone.

          • BobSF_94117

            So, you think it’s fine for Putin to seize European countries?

          • Kate

            No, nor do I think it’s the job (or right) of America to be world police.

            Sometimes, the right thing to do is to sit there and do nothing. The US has killed enough people with their “interventions”.

          • BobSF_94117

            Then let your candidate campaign on a promise to withdraw the U.S. from NATO.

          • Kate

            I’d like that. When someone does campaign on that promise, I’ll likely vote for them.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Trump = Clinton.

          • Kate

            In a lot of ways, yes. That’s why both their unfavorably ratings were so high.

            I happen to be opposed to free trade, and how it hurts workers and unions. On that front, Trump is better than Clinton.

            They are both pro-military. Clinton’s more likely to spend on wars, and Trump is more likely to spend on the military in general. They are both out-of-touch rich people, and both have policies that will hurt unions – Trump is simply the lesser on that front.

            There were two practical choices. I went with the guy who would harm free trade, and fight destructive immigration. The gun rights are a nice plus, but both of them want SCOTUS picks who are partisan and are going to ignore the constitution.

            330 million people, and they are who we got. Clinton the poster child for the establishment, and Trump wealthy and connected enough to buck the conventional establishment in favor of another one.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Trump, like Clinton, is a mad dog racist, a warmonger, and a union buster. They and the parties they represent are the enemy of working people.

          • GayOldLady

            Well Trump certainly is bucking “the conventional establishment” in his cabinet appointments to this point. All of his selections to this point are right wing establishment politicians, Wall Street guys or Right Wing Nut ex-Generals. The only appointment he’s made so far that isn’t establishment is Dr. Stabby.

            And you think Trump will keep us out of war. I predict that within 18 months we have forces on the ground in Syria and Iraq. Not consultant forces or training forces, but actually fighting forces. And as soon as he breaks the Iran deal, they’ll move back into Nuclear Arms mode and we’ll be considering Military action against Iran. Not to mention North Korea and Trumps stepping on the toes of China thus crippling our only diplomatic option at keeping NK in check.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Do try to keep up.

            Obama has combat troops engaged in a ground war in Iraq and Syria and is engaged in other wars against the people of Libya, Palestine, Afghanistan. Yemen and Pakistan.

          • Ray Taylor

            Wealthy. Like the 30B that does not exist.

          • Kate

            Are you referring to his net worth?

            He’s wealthy, though like a lot of business owners, how much he’s worth can be hard to pin down. When you’re not publicly traded, valuation gets to be interesting, and minor things can make a major difference.

          • Oikos

            Jobs aren’t coming back you idiot. Technology is replacing those jobs. Blocked for being a trump troll. If you are gay, you will lose your rights with the rest of us. Fuck you troll.

          • Todd20036

            Funny how all those coal miners magically think Trump is going to return to coal, which among other things, is not very profitable.

          • Oikos

            They also think manufacturing is coming back and other jobs but it’s never gonna happen.

          • Joe in PA
          • NO MORE GOP!

            You’re simply not in touch with reality, dear.

          • Dazzer

            Appeasement, protectionism and isolation served the USA so well in the late 1920s and 1930s didn’t it?

          • Todd20036

            You mean, he gave in to economic terrorism. Give a company millions in tax incentives or they will move, with no guarantee they won’t move later.

            And thawing Russian relations by ignoring their land grab in Crimea is not a good thing.

            And killing TPP means China has no competition. Real nice.

          • Kate

            It’s not economic terrorism – it’s pragmatism. They already opened another factory in Mexico – they were serious, and had already started the process. They weren’t asking for anything, so the notion that it was a temper tantrum to save on taxes is absurd. Those jobs were gone, he got them back.

            “No guarantee they won’t move later.”

            That’s what tariffs are for. Trump wants to do them, and is pushing the republicans to make them happen. NAFTA is an executive agreement that lowers the cost of doing business in Mexico and shipping to the US. It requires 6 month notice to modify, and he can’t start that clock until his first day in office.

            Once that’s done, there will be a guarantee – if they make their cars in Mexico, they will cost more. Producing cars in the US will be relatively cheaper, and companies that produce in the US will be at an advantage.

            Killing TPP means that the US doesn’t have even more tariff-free cheap labour countries. The US is a huge market on it’s own – there is no need for free trade with everyone.

          • GayOldLady

            Well Kate you have a gun so you don’t need any protection. And he didn’t “negotiate to bring jobs back”. The Carrier jobs that were retained through a $7 million dollar State Tax Incentive and not all of the jobs were retained. Trump didn’t do that. Pence has had the power to do that as the Governor of Indiana ever since Carrier announced they were offshoring jobs. You’re really not very smart!

          • Ray Taylor

            And now it has been reported that only 730 jobs are staying in thee US. Trump/Pence lied.

          • Bill_Perdue

            The only way to protect the economy is to confiscate the wealth of the rich without compensation and move towards the creation of a workers state.

          • Kate

            Eventually, I think we will head that direction, but it won’t be a workers state.

            Automation is eventually coming for everyone, and there’s going to be a point where there aren’t jobs for people unless we do make work. We don’t have people move cargo in warehouses with pulleys because we have forklifts. Having humans do that work just so a machine won’t is absurd.

            When we reach that point, we’re likely going to go the basic income route, because people have to eat, and there won’t be jobs. At that point, it’s not a workers state – it’s a people’s state.

          • Xiao Ai

            She’s one of the more clever trolls everyone. Block her. The more that you encourage her, the more you’ll encourage her to spend time on this blog. The more she spends time on it, the more she’ll twist information to her own end and for those who refuse to think for themselves she’ll damn them to an eternity of stupidity, bigotry and bias.

          • Kate

            Apparently, “wrongthink” is trolling. Who knew?

          • Xiao Ai

            Whatevs. You’re the sad sack claiming to have voted for Drumpf. It either shows a lack of intelligence, or an alterior motive. Neither, is good currency here.

          • Kate

            “Claiming to have voted”?

            Would you like to see my ballot? I promise, I actually voted for him.

          • GayOldLady

            “He’s starting to thaw the cold (and dangerous) relations we’ve had with Russia. That’s a very good thing.”

            Actually, it’s a very bad thing. Getting cozy with Russia isn’t a good idea unless you believe that Russia has the right to cannibalize Eastern Europe. Russia is the biggest geopolitical threat on the planet.

          • Kate

            I don’t believe that we have the right to play world police.

          • GayOldLady

            You better believe that as the World’s Super Power we have to keep our continent safe and that means keeping the other Nuclear Powers in check through diplomacy if possible but through deterrence if necessary. You carry a gun with you everywhere you go because you’re afraid of Americans, but you believe our Military shouldn’t be stationed around the globe to deter aggressors like Russia? Of course you do know that Russia isn’t a democracy don’t you? You understand it’s people have no real say in their governance, right?

          • Kate

            “You carry a gun with you everywhere you go because you’re afraid of Americans, but you believe our Military shouldn’t be stationed around the globe to deter aggressors like Russia?”

            I believe that people should defend themselves, their country, and their home. I think they should leave others alone. The same goes for countries.

            “Of course you do know that Russia isn’t a democracy don’t you? You understand it’s people have no real say in their governance, right?”

            China, too. It’s not the job of the US to ensure the world is a democracy. Russians are free to run their own affairs, including overthrowing their own government, should they choose to do so. It’s not our job to encourage, nor discourage, them from doing so.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Says the old cold warrior.

          • Dazzer

            Your problem is that you don’t think the USA ought to be involved in a globalised neighbourhood watch.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Did you renounce your allegiance to the English crown and volunteer for the American invasion of Vietnam. If you say no then you’re a coward as well as an Islamophobic racist.

            Republican Senator CHARLES HAGEL: “People say we’re not fighting for oil. Of course we are. They talk about America’s national interest. What the hell do you think they’re talking about? We’re not there for figs.” (Speaking at Catholic University, Sept. 24, 2007)

            Former Federal Reserve Chairman ALAN GREENSPAN, in his book The Age of Turbulence; Adventures in a New World: “I’m saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: The Iraq war is largely about oil.”

            Democratic Senator JOHN TESTER: “We’re still fighting a war in Iraq and people who are honest about it will admit we’re there over oil.” (Associated Press, Sept. 24, 2007)

            General JOHN ABIZAID, retired commander of CENTCOM: “Of course it’s about oil, we can’t really deny that.” (Speaking at Stanford University, Oct. 13, 2007)

            In their pursuit of oil hegemony and controlling the profits of gas pipe lines US military commanders deliberately set Sunni against Shiite, and both against Kurds. That’s the common policy of the Bushes, the Clintons and Obama and the Democrat and Republican parties.

          • Todd20036

            Kate likes to be grabbed by the pussy.

          • GayOldLady

            Apparently!! And she thinks Trump is going to protect her from “illegal aliens”. She’s obviously paranoid because she packs a sidearm everywhere she goes because the world she lives in is so dangerous. And she claims to be gay, which I’m certain is a LIE. Also she is new to Disqus which scream RATFUCKER! So, goodbye Kate.

          • Lumpy Gaga

            Isn’t this Kate of the Guns? Smells like it. She and JMG go way back, actually.

            But yeah, *plonk*.

          • GayOldLady

            Well she’s new to Disqus.

          • Dazzer

            Not really. Before s/he called her/himself ‘Kate’ he/she was called ‘Kay’ and used to comment here. Dunno if Joe banned her or him, but this is the name of a previous commenter.

          • GayOldLady

            Do you recognize the photo?

          • Dazzer

            LOL! No. I recognise the writing and debating style. I work frequently as an editor, so word patterns and the way in which someone presents an argument are usually apparent.

            🙂 Luvs you gal for picking me up on that and making me laugh 🙂

          • GayOldLady

            Well, I’m her for the laughs. 🙂 I’ve been commenting her for about 2 years although I did lurk for a long time before I commented so I don’t remember her.

          • Dazzer

            The most important point about my previous comment is that I luvs ya.

            Don’t always agree with you, but there’sno denying that when you comment you shine brighter than the Ko-in-noh diamond at the centre of Queen Brenda’s crown.

            🙂

          • GayOldLady

            Well thank you honey. I love the lot of you flying monkeys and mostly because y’all make me laugh. 🙂

          • Paula

            I am here because I live for the snark. I remember her.

          • TimCA

            I remember her too. And just for a laugh, Kate just posted elsewhere on this thread a link to an organization called the Public Interest Legal Foundation that supposedly has provided incontrovertible proof of massive illegal voting in the country. There are 6 board members of the organization, three of the 6 board members consist of anti-gay nut jobs like Cleta Mitchell, John Eastman and Brian Brown.

            BTW-Kate self identifies as gay…..go figure 🙁

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            Basically a far right front group for nationwide voter suppression

          • Stogiebear

            I do. Recognize both the name(s) and the photo. This Kate/Kay is a long-time NRA-fellator. She’s just been absent for a while.

            She lives in such a gray world.

          • GayOldLady

            Yes, the grayest of gray worlds. She’s armed everywhere she goes and she’s afraid of her fellow citizens, but she’s not afraid of Putin. Go figure!

          • TimCA

            Yup!

          • agcons

            She also moved to Victoria, BC, some time ago, she says. This would make her vote for Trump an absentee vote, and any risk that might arise from that one that won’t be experienced directly.

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            I dont think kay and kate are the same. Kay never replied much. It just made smug know it all comments and veiled insults but never got in a discussion. This kate argues and doubles down.

          • TimCA

            Hey Lumpy,

            I remember her! That was like 2 or 3 years ago wasn’t it? Didn’t she own a security company or something and was the poster gal for the 2nd amendment. She’s also definitely the same as Kay who was posting here a few weeks back too.

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            Well kay said she was some type of mastermind computer programmer who worked in cyber security in anti hacking. Oh and she saw evidence of hillarys email crimes.
            Yeah yeah yeah.
            Its easy to sound magnificent in cyberspace

          • medaka

            I don’t think she’s new — just a new account. She’s been here for a while, usually just with her gun-nut spiel.

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            Keep it real GOL! you go girl!

          • Bill_Perdue

            You sound just like Trump.

          • Lumpy Gaga

            No. She’s hella stupid without going there….

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            If kate even actually posseses a pussy. It is cyberspace. Kate could be vlad putin for all we know

          • David Walker

            I think I pulled a muscle on my last eye roll.

          • Oikos

            Clinton isn’t part of the equation any more. If you voted for a third party candidate or dump, your protestations against Clinton are irrelevant.

          • Kate

            They are still relevant as long as we have people trying to recount or faithless elector her into office.

          • ralphb

            You deserve Trump, as do any other morons who couldn’t see him for what he was and make the correct choice. Let’s see how your feel when he takes your rights away.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Trump = H Clinton

          • Kate

            He’s not going to take away my rights, nor yours (unless you are an illegal alien).

            Let’s see how you feel when he actually delivers on his promises.

          • Bill_Perdue

            There are no illegal aliens, except for the descendants of European settlers and colonists. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e09a73231d68b45b84b2ea0e3fba395260358195f23600f2831a545209cfe204.jpg

          • Salton

            For once you’re right about something!

          • Bill_Perdue

            Thanks, Democrats are always wrong. Especially when they vote for Obama’s racism. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a03e0f47cfa6b449730c871c0028d49802d736d8574e155e6845495ee212dc7c.jpg

          • Kate

            Given how well that worked out for the native Americans, can you understand why the europeans wouldn’t want the same?

            The europeans conquered them. I didn’t do it – you didn’t do it, our parents didn’t do it.

            I don’t believe in the sins of the parent being passed onto the child. Original sin is a load of shit.

          • Bill_Perdue
          • Kate

            It worked out so well for them, so we should do it too?

            I thought those who don’t learn from history are destined to repeat it.

            https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/49/1a/ee/491aee47bd60c2607d638682b2c7284d.jpg

          • Kate

            https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/49/1a/ee/491aee47bd60c2607d638682b2c7284d.jpg

            It worked out so well for them, so we should repeat history? I thought we are supposed to learn from it.

          • Lumpy Gaga

            Or you burn the flag…..

          • Kate

            Senator Clinton literally introduced legislation to criminalize flag burning. If that’s what you cared about most, you should have voted third party.

          • Lumpy Gaga

            It didn’t come up (or rather, I should say, DeadbeatDonald didn’t TWEET it) until after the election.

            What a waste of good demagoguery.

          • Will Parkinson

            Which ones? To ‘drain the swamp’ by selecting a cabinet that is totally opposite of what he said? He’s already doubled back on many of his ‘promises’.

          • (((GC)))
          • Ninja0980

            You’re right, he won’t take away our rights.
            The Republicans who will give him anti-LGBT legislation and the far right judges in the mold of Scalia he’ll appoint will do that.

          • TimCA

            “He’s not going to take away my rights”

            His judicial appointments and cabinet picks will do that. Once democracy, civil rights and access to the ballot box have been compromised then he’ll make his ultimate move.

            Let’s see your arsenal of handguns protect you then.

          • jsmukg

            IMBECILE.

          • Kate

            If you don’t like the message, shoot the messenger.

          • jsmukg

            If you ‘think’ Trump has done anything but lie for the past year and a half, you are beyond imbecile. It is, of course, documented beyond the possibility of debate, and he has already changed most of his ‘positions’ before even being inaugurated, but don’t let actuality and reality, not to mention facts, get in your way, KAY.

          • Kate

            My name is Kate, but you can call me “Kay” if it makes you feel better.

            Trump has softened some of his positions – in part, because he listens to people (oh no!), and in part because when negotiating, you want to start asking for more than you actually want so you can settle for what you are shooting for. It’s in his book, “The Art of the Deal”. You’re welcome to read it.

            So far, he hasn’t had a day in office, so it’s a little early to accuse him of lying and misleading people. So far, the only one I know of who has lied to me recently is you, two hours ago, when you said that you had blocked me, meaning I wouldn’t be listening to your inane chatter anymore.

            Can you please keep your word? I do dislike liars.

          • jsmukg

            “Softened?” You are beyond farce.
            Your name is neither KAY, your first troll sockpuppet name, nor Kate; like everything else you have posted about yourself, that is a lie. Since you ‘dislike liars’ and defend Trump (and cannot defend nor explain any of his trillions of lies) your self-hatred is quite apparent, as is your rather sociopathic schizophrenia. You inhabit the post-truth abattoir, sockpuppet, and you’re almost amusing–which is why I have put up with your gibberish for a few more comments, just to see what insanity you could muster next.
            You’re welcome to stop while you’re behind, dear. You’re welcome to stop lying, since you so ‘dislike liars,’ but for you that would require a lobotomy, sadly. You’re also welcome to register and be blockable, but of course sockpuppets never register, do they now? The ‘hush’ feature of killfile is fine except that sockpuppet responses still appear in one’s notifications (a serious flaw in disqus) but I have the solution… I’ll just scroll past your asinine attempts at replies from now on. Like a damaged and desperate child, you are starved for attention and notice of any sort–even pejorative–and to deny you that is to kill you.

          • Kate

            So, we have psychological projection, an inability to recognize that someone can hold opinions outside those of their “party”, and an insistence that I’m a “sockpuppet”. You claim that my name is not my own – an interesting delusion that I must admit I didn’t expect from someone.

            If I weren’t worried about what you would do with the information, I’d verify my claim – I’m findable enough, if one cares to look.

            “You’re welcome to stop lying”

            I haven’t lied, and as someone who rather makes a point of radical honesty, I’m curious – what lies do you think I’m telling (other than my name)? I’m serious.

            There are millions of gay people. There are millions of Trump voters. As such, it should come as no surprise there are gay trump supporters. There are also gay trump supporters that support firearms rights. I have no need to lie of such things.

            What is someone to do when someone insists on calling them a liar, over things that are both highly probably, and for which there is no particular reason to lie?

          • Kate

            “You’re also welcome to register and be blockable, but of course sockpuppets never register”.

            When I registered my disqus account, I used my facebook account. Disqus automatically issued me a username; I had no say in what they chose. You can click on my account and see all the comments I have made since.

            Just for you, I have changed the username with my account. It’s no longer auto-generated. I doubt it will have any impact, and strongly suspect you could have blocked me before, but I did it just in case it makes it easier for you to keep your promise and block me. Far be it from me to stand in the way of a man keeping his word.

          • Kate

            I’ve been a poster on this site for years. I was there on the old blog back before disqus, and I have been on disqus since the switch.

            I did delete my facebook account for a while (had a problem with some family members trying to hunt me down, and I didn’t want them to.

            https://disqus.com/by/disqus_Yu4NZkoYY0/?

            Note the name: Kate. Once upon a time, I went by Kathrin. You can see one of my 2012 posts here: http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2012/10/airlines-begin-frankenstorm-shutdown.html

            I changed my handle when I changed my legal name. I changed it from Kathrin to Kate, because Kate was what I went by (and our marriage wasn’t recognized, so it required a legal name for our last names to match). Since I was doing it anyway, I decided to make my name official.

            Deleting one’s facebook account deletes the link, hence two autogenerated disqus IDs. You can stop with the conspiracy theories, seriously.

          • agcons

            Of course he won’t take away your rights. You moved to Victoria, correct?

          • Kate

            I’m currently in Canada (not Victoria). We moved due to marriage equality right before the SCOTUS ruling. We were starting the adoption process, and didn’t want to do it in a country where marriage was a problem.

            We’re moving back in a year or so. I’m looking forward to the Trump presidency, and consider it a shame we’re going to miss the first year. Two years ago, I was frustrated, I was angry. I refused to vote for either party for most of my life, and felt there weren’t enough people willing to do something different, to make a change, to try to bring the US back from the brink. So, I left, so I could go somewhere my family could be safe.

            I was wrong. There were enough patriots, enough people who were “mad as hell”. There is a real opportunity to make a difference, and I want to be a part of it. So, back we come – it just takes a while to clear up our affairs, sell our home in Ontario, etc.

            I wrote about why I left a few years back – it was linked to my old facebook account, but it’s still me.

            https://disqus.com/home/discussion/joemygod/joe_my_god_election_night_open_thread/#comment-1677307983

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            Buddy this is some weird mormom right wing sister wife whos bored and likes to bother the gays.
            Block kate. Your blood pressure will thank u

          • Oikos

            If you think dump is less of a danger than Clinton please let me know so I can block you. I have zero time or tolerance for fucking idiots.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Blocking is for cowardly oinkers who can’t formulate political responses. Thanks for blocking me, oinker. It’s an honor.

          • GayOldLady

            Then you need to block her because she is a “fuck idiot”.

          • Todd20036

            Speak for your self. If I wasn’t willing to fuck idiots, I’d never get laid!

          • Dazzer

            I share your policy, except I add blind drunks and close-to-death in my ‘getting fucked’ strategy.

          • SECRET_SOLDIER

            ROTFLMAO

          • Bill_Perdue

            Clinton belongs to you. H Clinton was the Senator from WalMart and spent six years on the Walmart Board of Directors. She and B Clintons are tied to the five children in Sam Walton’s litter, who’ve collectively stolen $150 billion from WalMart workers. “The Walton family is the richest family in the United States and one of the richest in the world. They are heirs to the Walmart fortune and the company’s largest shareholders, with over fifty percent ownership of stock in the retail giant. … The Walton’s aren’t just the face of the 1%; they’re the face of the 0.000001%. The Walton’s have more wealth than 42% of American families combined.” Walmart 1% website.

          • Lumpy Gaga

            Apostrophe abuse!!!! FLAGGED!!

          • zhera

            What dangerous policies? Health care for all? Equal rights for all? More jobs than before he took office? Reducing the deficit?

          • Bill_Perdue

            Stop lying.

            Obama care is not socialized medicine.

            There is no semblance of equality in a nation of state imposed union busting and income inequality, mad dog killer cops, rabid racism on the border and attacks on the Bill of Rights – all caused by those who enable Democrats and your Republican brothers and sisters.

            We can reduce the debt and fund Medicare and good housing by confiscation the wealth of the bankster class without compensation, something you reactionaries oppose.

            You view of the US is clouded by your right wing politics, but please, keep on smoking that hilbot hopium.

          • BlindBill

            I think the fact that NO living person who has held the position of President of the United States of America supported or endorsed the trump candidacy is a very clear indicator of their lack of faith in trump’s ability to dutifully carry out presidential responsibilities.
            As you should know, there is a list of 150 top republicans that chose not to endorse the republican presidential nominee. They believed so strongly that trump lacked the skill set necessary for the job that they chose to buck their party line.
            Please explain why all of these people are wrong in their educated/experienced assessment of trump’s lack of ability to be successful in that office.

          • Kate

            “I think the fact that NO living person who has held the position of President of the United States of America supported or endorsed the trump candidacy is a very clear indicator of their lack of faith in trump’s ability to dutifully carry out presidential responsibilities.”

            Or, it simply means that they thought Clinton was better.

            “Please explain why all of these people are wrong in their educated/experienced assessment of trump’s lack of ability to be successful in that office.”

            At the end of the day, the election isn’t about what the federal government wants, or what the establishment wants. It’s about what the states want, and their people, as the states elect the president. He was elected because he was an outsider, and different from the status quo. He’s hated because he’s an outsider, and different from the status quo.

          • BlindBill

            OK, top republicans’ and ex presidents’ strongly held opinions based on experience have no barring in making your decision on who is qualified to be the president of the USA – and apparently there are many other voters who feel the same way – not most of the voters, just many of them. Therefore, we have the electoral college to make sure that there is a fail-safe to prevent unqualified or in other-ways unsuitable candidates form gaining the most powerful position in the world.

            So just to circle back around – the electoral collage is there for a reason – regardless of where the candidates chose to campaign, they all knew that they needed to have the votes of the electoral college to win the election, they all knew that the duty of the electoral college is NOT TO RUBBER STAMP their selection, but to consider the candidate, the candidate’s qualifications, and the candidates actions and then to vote for the person who would best safeguard the republic.
            Your opinion on why trump is disliked (or hated as you say) is only your opinion. As to the “status quo” – I would not be so sure that the new status quo will be something you are happy with either – with 662 positions needing senate confirmation, trump has only made 12 selections – so far, none of those selections reflect “clearing the swamp” – instead it appears to be putting the foxes in charge of the hen house.

          • David Walker

            Happily, we have people who can yell, sort of like your fake news idols. Our folks tend to do research and fact check beforehand. For JMG regulars, NSFW.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfpkhXTdVwI

          • jsmukg

            KAY, darling little Breitbart NAZI SNOWFLAKE, you have been debunked, mortified, shamed, embarrassed, and thoroughly schooled by everyone on this board. We have called out your EVERY fascist reactionary wingnut ‘site’ and ‘source,’ revealing the interested parties and their sociopathic Rethug axe-grinding. We have argued down your every specious, factitious, illogical tirade. You have dozens of downvotes on every comment and the only upvotes you ever receive are from sockpuppets and Macedonian trollbots. Go back to the gunsuckers, Breitbart, WND, and
            SHUT.
            THE.
            FUCK.
            UP.
            Blocked.

          • Kate

            Remember kids, if you don’t agree with someone, simply call them a nazi. “Argument ad Hitlerum” can work for you, too!

          • jsmukg

            Remember kids, if you change your troll nom de plume to try to obscure your identity, always change it to something which starts with the same first two letters as your first handle, so that it will be completely unidentifiable. Also remember that if you wish to pretend to be someone else you should write in exactly the same way, using identical sentence constructions and all the same absurd, illogical ‘arguments.’ Finally, always keep in mind that if you have been publicly called out and disgraced by every poster on the board, simply trot out the weariest, tiredest, most impotent Reichwing cliches in your attempts at Kellyanne-style deflection, denial, and spin. Cheesy attempts at Pig Latin can work for you, too, since you have absolutely nothing else!

          • Kate

            I apologize for phrasing the term incorrectly – it’s “Reductio ad Hitlerum”, which is a play on the term “Reductio ad absurdism” – a reasoning technique in which a principle is examined by taking it to the absurd. The latter is a good technique to identify some logical fallacies. The former is what led to Godwin’s law, and is an intelletually bankrupt way to attempt to silence people you don’t agree with.

            Since Hitler is the ultimate evil, calling people you disagree with Hitler is a good way to shut down conversation. There are all kinds of ways to do it – simply pick any attribute shared between Hitler and the target, and reduce them to that one attribute. It’s a go-to ad hominem attack, great for when you don’t have anything of substance to say.

            Many technical words have their origins in Latin. Since you seem to have a difficult time differentiating between pig latin and hyperbole, I’ll endeavour to use shorter words and simpler sentences when addressing you in the future.

            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum
            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

            I’ve never heard the term “Reichwing” before, but I do have to give you credit for consistency. It’s a perfect example of calling everyone you don’t like a Nazi. Between doubling down on that nonsense, and calling people trolls, you’ve really got a thing going.

            My name is Kate. That’s why my disqus name is also Kate. I know – it’s a shocker! Apparently seeking balance and an understanding of people with differing views is trolling. One learns all kinds of things in the comments section.

          • jsmukg

            The phrase is ‘reductio ad absurdUM,’ not ‘reductio ad absurdISM.’ Such a basic error regarding a simple construction is the ultimate in Pig Latin , or should I say Piggish Latin? Your ignorance shines through in such egregious and juvenile mistakes, which make your risible attempts at condescension even more rip-roaringly funny. Some of your other ‘typos’ include ‘assESS chaps’ and ‘we’ve went,’ and those are only a few of the many. KAY, sweetie, do quit while you’re behind.

          • Kate

            “Such a basic error” …

            … and one that I can thank the iPad autocorrect for. I usually catch them. My apologies.

          • Kate

            Others have raised good points, but that doesn’t qualify as “debunking”. A claim has been made (for example, that illegals vote), supporting evidence provided (through several sources), and no evidence to the contrary has been provided. At best, the claim is “no evidence”, which proves nothing other than there aren’t very many proven instances of actual voting. A million people could be voting illegally, and unless we have evidence they aren’t, the registrations alone are sufficient to be concerning.

            “Mortified, shamed, embarrassed”

            [citation required], please. Those are emotions I have no particular reason to feel. I’ve had some interesting discussions, and others have made some good points. I’ve considered a few things, and in my time here, learned to appreciate the value of people with different perspectives, rather than just retreating to an echo chamber. Can the same be said of yourself?

            “specious, facetious, illogical”

            Specious: possibly, though the evidence isn’t there to claim that yet.
            Facetious: not at all. I’m quite serious about my positions.
            Illogical: You are welcome to try to point out logical inconsistencies. If you manage it, I’ll even change my mind. Does the same hold true for you?

          • Bill_Perdue

            They’re the honest and thoughtful part of the electorate who who rejected your and your Republican brothers and sisters.

            You think that their duty is to choose between two equally noxious racists, warmongers and union busters. Their real duty is not to vote for the rich, something you seem to have had no trouble doing. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/39a3099bd1560529d475fb5b68181b6d356546b6f726a0ba806ba9ed0393391c.jpg

          • ralphb

            You troll real good.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Democrats troll, socialists comment.

          • Todd20036

            Trump raped a child, but somehow he’s better than Clinton because she had a private server.

          • (((GC)))

            IKOIYAR. It was perfectly fine for Secretary Colin Powell to use a private email account.

            Immediately after “winning” the election, Popular Vote Loser tRump spoke to foreign leaders on unsecured phone lines — when unsecured communications is precisely what he wants to jail Ms. Clinton for!

            (He also forwent State Department briefing materials. And he also paid $25 million to settle Trump “University” fraud charges — highly unlikely that he was innocent.)

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            And clinton changed her mind on gay issues remember. Bill hates her for not being born pro-gay

          • Bill_Perdue

            Stop dissembling and being an excuse monger for the right. She’s a rebranded rabid bigot.

            “Hillary Clinton evolved on same-sex marriage within the first 72 hours of her presidential run, as her campaign said Wednesday that the former secretary of state now backs marriage equality as a US constitutional right.
            The about-face, dropped as Clinton was preparing the second of two progressive-leaning appearances in Iowa, represents a significant – if not completely unexpected – shift from her previous statements that same-sex marriage should be legislated state-by-state rather than on the federal level.”
            http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/15/hillary-clinton-gay-marriage-presidential-campaign?CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZkK2_6H9MM

          • Bill_Perdue

            They’re the smart ones who don’t become dupes for Trump or Clinton like you did.

        • BlindBill

          you quote a false assertion [from heavy.com] that “95 million voters refused to vote because …bla bla bla…both parties are enemies of workers”
          While it is true that about 95 million eligible voters did not vote, but the leap into voter psyche and motivation is pure fiction.

          • Bill_Perdue

            It’s a political description and it fits in with the vast unpopularity of you Democrats and your Republican brothers and sisters.

    • Kate

      Given the qualifications to be president (35 years old, lived in the US, born a US person), he’s entirely qualified to be president.

      That may not be a good thing, but it is the law. The founders (for obvious reasons) didn’t want to give the government too much control over who is “permitted” to be president.

      • BobSF_94117

        You so-called conservatives normally LOVE Hamilton. Why don’t you like what he wrote about the dangers of incompetent populists?

        • Kate

          I’m not a conservative. I’m an advocate for states rights (because that permits people to have a greater range of options), and in favor of firearms rights, tariffs, and labour. I’m in favor of a weak federal government, and states that are distinct, holding the power reserved to them in the tenth amendment.

          Some of my positions are conservative. Many are rather liberal (drugs, homosexuality, labor, etc.).

          • GayOldLady

            “homosexuality”?????? You’re definitely NOT gay.

          • Oscarlating Wildely

            Yep, we go by Bi, Gay, Queer, or just ol’ not hetero but have yet to hear someone note “I am a homosexual.”

          • Kate

            Ok, so I’m not gay, I just fuck and married someone of the same sex, and got to spend most of my marriage with it not recognized by the federal government (or states) because they considered me gay.

            Got it. So, like Peter Thiel, I’m “not gay” because I don’t toe the party line.

            http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/19/peter-thiel-not-gay-man-supporting-donald-trump-lg/

          • Oscarlating Wildely

            If you are gay and voted for a man that selected a person who shunted funds from HIV research to gay conversion, who would allow anyone and everyone who wants to claim “religious freedom” as hogwash deserving of antigay discrimination, who honestly believes that Christianity should be likened on to a state religion, who vowed to fight marriage equality, and who would try to roll back rights that we have already gotten slowly but surely for the LGBTQ community– sure, you may be gay but you’re also a piss poor part of the LGBTQ community.

          • Kate

            “If you are gay and voted for a man that selected a person who shunted funds from HIV research to gay conversion”

            I didn’t. I voted for Trump. Pence is the wart on his backside.

            “who would allow anyone and everyone who wants to claim “religious freedom” as hogwash deserving of antigay discrimination”

            Your sentence is hard to parse, but I think you are saying he wants to let people discriminate by claiming religious freedom. I see religion as a pox on humanity, and am glad that there is a constitution and a congress, as well as the fact that he’s not president, standing in the way of that.

            ” who honestly believes that Christianity should be likened on to a state religion”

            Again, what Pence believes is irrelevant. He’s not president, and even if he were, it’s up to congress to pass those laws.

            “who vowed to fight marriage equality”

            As opposed to [Bill] Clinton, who passed DOMA, Obama, who didn’t support it when he was first elected, or Hillary, who still doesn’t support it (per Wikileaks)?

            “sure, you may be gay but you’re also a piss poor part of the LGBTQ community.”

            I wasn’t the one who put me as part of the community. I’m gay, and I care about labour. I think that pride parades are often disgusting, and I oppose the hedonism that we often see in them. I think that gay people deserve equal rights, but oppose laws forcing people to hire anyone, on the basis of things that are a choice (religion), or not (race, age, sex, you name it).

            It’s society that lumps me in with the LGB community – I certainly didn’t try to put myself here.

          • Oscarlating Wildely

            I believe that a person who is one heartbeat away from the presidency is more than a wart. He is a chosen replacement. All of Pence’s arguments apply to Trump.

            And please don’t call us a “we” at Pride parades. It’s obvious: “We” are not a we at all. “We” don’t see “disgusting hedonism” at Pride parades. Please don’t assume that you have anything to do with me or my family at those events.
            instead, I see the Boy Scout troop from Orlando gathered to raise the American flag to memorialize the dead. I see groups of teens gathered in Trevor t-shirts to make sure other youth know they are not alone. I see elderly people like Edie Windsor and the Stonewall Veterans remind me of how far we have come. I see people wearing feathers, bows, sequins, and flags and I see nothing wrong with it. I see couples openly–gasp– holding hands and kissing. I see people showing off great bodies– like every channel I flip on TV, and yes, I believe that all bodies are beautiful. I see cops and veterans in uniforms, not afraid of saying who they are. I see schools with banners that read “All Welcome Here.” I see churches and restaurants handing out water do we as marchers don’t faint in the heat. That is what I see, at least in NYC in the span of about two blocks of any given Pride parade.

            I don’t care if you and I are the two biggest Trump supporters that walk the face of this planet. You say the above is hedonism. Sorry, you’re wrong. And I have no interest in continuing the conversation with such a myopic view on this topic.

          • Kate

            Per your request, I have changed “we” to I, with respect to the hedonism at some pride parades. I was referring to a larger we (society), but I can see the ambiguity.

            I have no problem with the boy scout troops, Trevor shirts, public degrees of affection, or even beautiful bodies. For reference, I’m referring more to the “Folsom Street Fair” side of things, and I’m equal opportunity – I’m not a fan of hypersexualized public behavior from straight folks either.

            My problem is with assess chaps and public nudity, not with love. I don’t like sexualized dress (or undress) in public in general.

          • Dean

            states rights is a bunch of bullshit that enables right-wing nut jobs and religious zealots to operate freely to the detriment of any kind of social progress.

          • Oscarlating Wildely

            Oh, if we could only break PA into two states, Philly and its environs and the rest of Trumpistan I would totally be into states rights– as long as we could build a wall to keep them out. Of course, their economy would tank but hey! I’m sure you can eat coal.

          • BobSF_94117

            Yes, you believe in states rights…. but you want national concealed carry.

            Your positions are a jumble.

          • Kate

            Not particularly. I believe in states rights, with the constitution overriding them in select issues. That includes free speech, gun rights, unreasonable search and seizure, self-incrimination, due process, full-faith and credit for acts of other states, and so on.

            The second amendment is in the constitution, and very clear. National concealed carry falls under both the second amendment, and full faith and credit.

        • Oscarlating Wildely

          I honestly have no idea why conseratives would do so.
          1) It makes an immigrant “bastard, son of a whore” the hero. Not seeing GOTP liking any such group, unless it’s the hooker that they’re paying and the bastard is Jesus.
          2) Duels are stupid. That’s presented time and time again. Smacks against gun rights.
          3) Um, Hamilton and Laurens hooked up. And Laurens hooked up with lots of dudes. Shitloads of ’em. He was a hottie. And he got around.
          4) The other hero: A French dude. Freedom fries?
          5) The whitest person is also the biggest asshole. George III might have been mad but he is a total dick and not in a good way.
          6) The whole thrill of Hamilton is his writing. Have you read Conservative writing lately? Erudition? Insights? Evidence? No, not of interest.
          7) Clue: They rap. You know that only people in the “urban areas” do that, right?
          8) Let’s forego Peggy for a moment; she like Tiffany Trump. Eliza and Angelica: they were some bad ass bitches and proud of it. Nasty women!
          There is nothing, nothing at all, that appeals to Conservatives here. In fact the premise of the musical is distinctly non-conservative. And no, just because it’s about a founder doesn’t make it conservative.

          And the guy who trained Washington’s troops? Totes into dick. Lots and lots of dick. Yuuummm, dick.

          • BobSF_94117

            I meant Hamilton the person. But thanks for that. 🙂

      • NO MORE GOP!

        You have a very low bar for “qualified”.

        • Kate

          It’s the constitution’s bar. The framers didn’t want to set up a system where only the educated elites could be president.

          • Dean

            Actually, a great many of them did. The EC iwas really a way for the propertied elite to have dominion over the common man.

          • GayOldLady

            Hahahahaha!!!! You don’t really believe that do you? And you voted for Donald Trump who spent his life in Private boarding schools, among the most elite people in the Country. A person who’s lived his life in Penthouses cheating people our of their money at every opportunity. Kate, you’re seriously demented.

          • Kate

            I had two choices – Hillary, and Trump. Both are rich, connected assholes.

          • NO MORE GOP!

            And you’re clearly ignorant about history, too. Overall, you simply have no coherent, cogent arguments. So perhaps trolling elsewhere might prove more fruitful for you, dear.

    • Ninja0980

      This man will get us into WWIII before the end of the year if he isn’t stopped.

  • DesertSun59

    It’s clear that this firefighter has a bizarre way of looking at reality, but his voice is needed, nonetheless. You can be sure he’ll be marginalized by his friends and colleagues now.

    • Rambie

      Yes, 9/11 was used to divide the country by the end of 2002.

  • safari

    The electoral college exists for a reason.

    • canoebum

      The Federalist Papers specifically point to our current situation (Number 68). It is the responsibility of the Electoral College to prevent such a person as Donald J. Trump from becoming President of the United States of America.

      “Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States”

      If Hamilton was not referring to Der Herr, I can’t imagine who would fit the bill.

      • safari

        I should really read the Anti/Federalist Papers at some point.

    • Bill_Perdue

      Yes. It’s one of many checks on democracy. The US is not a democracy.

      “A new scientific study from Princeton researcher Martin Gilens and Northwestern researcher Benjamin I. Page has finally put some science behind the recently popular argument that the United States isn’t a democracy any more. And they’ve found that in fact, America is basically an oligarchy.

      Comparing the preferences of the average American at the 50th percentile of income to what those Americans at the 90th percentile preferred, as well as the opinions of major lobbying or business groups, the researchers found out that the government followed the directives set forth by the latter two much more often. It’s beyond alarming.

      As Gilens and Page write, ‘the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.’ In other words, their statistics say your opinion literally does not matter.” https://mic.com/articles/87719/princeton-concludes-what-kind-of-government-america-really-has-and-it-s-not-a-democracy#.JFsaGXuFO
      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8c63e9f133aa018ec28f2d4246fa5ef9f033ca55a159db71f904a4eb96a0dd76.jpg

      • JT

        You are too stupid to understand that that article doesn’t mean what you think it does.

        • Bill_Perdue

          jt is a pathetic loser whines too much

          • Dazzer

            Then why do you whine about being blocked so much. No-one on this site whines as much as you.

            You treat this place like a ‘Whine and Oh Jeez’ party.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Learn to read. I thanked the oinker for blocking me. It’s and honor. ULIPigobi.

          • Dazzer

            Yeah, yeah, yeah,

            And back to the point about misogyny.

            Care to condemn it, Brother Perdue?

          • Bill_Perdue

            Socialists condemn your racism and patronizing misogyny, UKIPigboi.

          • JT

            Try to get your great, fat puddinhead to read what even the authors of that study say it means. Of course, that would require you to be able to be able to understand precision and points of detail. You are just too stupid.

            http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/princeton-scholar-demise-of-democracy-america-tpm-interview

          • Bill_Perdue

            jt is a pathetic loser who whines too much

          • JT

            You are vile, contemptible, lying, cowardly Nazi collaborator scum and you know it.. Your hypocritical anti-war bullshit has got you Mad Dog Mattis and your Nazi lord and master, “we have nukes to use them” Drumpf, to endanger the world. Your hypocritical faux pro-worker bullshit and mindless false equivalences have got you the American Hitler as your overlord..

        • Oikos

          You only need the first 4 words of your sentence.

          • Bill_Perdue

            oinker is for racism, wars of aggression and is a scab. oinker opposes ENDA and socialized medicine. That’s why he voted Democrat and/or Republican.

          • Oikos

            Poor trolita is blocked. Who is a pretty troll? Go fetch trolita!!

          • Bill_Perdue

            Thanks for blocking me, oinker. It’s an honor that you admit your cowardice and that you’re too dimwitted to reply politically. That makes you even more irrelevant, oinker and that’s a very good thing.

  • Ian

    Must see TV for Trump’s reaction.

    • Rambie

      Must see Twitter you mean

  • AW

    I believe that this voter isn’t incorrect but I think his reasoning is flawed. Sure we were more united in the days after September 11, 2001 but that quickly turned as it was used to divide the nation much further.

    Anyway, I still applaud his decision to not vote for Trump. We need many more like him.

  • Oikos

    Article doesn’t tell us whether he voted for Hair Furor in the GE.

    • david fairfield

      I get the impression he voted Trump and has regrets…

      • Oikos

        He should have thought about this before voting. It is unlikely enough electors will switch votes for us to avoid this catastrophe.

      • JT

        Imagine voting for a con man and then having regrets about it.

        • Bill_Perdue

          You did, except she’s a con woman.

          Clinton Spends Most of Her Time with the Ultra-Wealthy New York Times: “Mr. Trump has pointed to Mrs. Clinton’s noticeably scant schedule of campaign events this summer to suggest she has been hiding from the public. But Mrs. Clinton has been more than accessible to those who reside in some of the country’s most moneyed enclaves and are willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to see her. In the last two weeks of August, Mrs. Clinton raked in roughly $50 million at 22 fund-raising events, averaging around $150,000 an hour, according to a New York Times tally.” Via Teagan Goddards Political Wire

          • Dazzer

            Feckless, witless misogynist.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Comment politically or be ignored, UKIPboi.

          • Dazzer

            You think being called a misogynist isn’t a political statement? Therein lies the first of your many ideological problems.

          • Bill_Perdue

            People who voter against your favorite racist did so because we abhor racism, unlike you UKIPpigbois. Your attempts to vilify the makes you even more irrelevant, troll.

            Comment politically or be ignored, UKIPboi.

          • Dazzer

            I;ll ignore your silly insults. They’re meaningless pablum.

            Instead, answer my question: Is misogyny a political problem?

            And answer truhfully, because I know your political history.

            If you think misogyny isn’t a political issue, then have the guts and principles to say so publicly in this forum.

          • Bill_Perdue

            People who voted against your favorite racist did so because we abhor racism, unlike you UKIPpigbois. Your attempts to vilify us makes you even more irrelevant, troll.

            Comment politically or be ignored, UKIPboi.

          • Dazzer

            OK, I’ll say this clearly.

            Throughout your career, you have diminsished the importance of women in any Internationale – notably the Fourth Internationale that Trotsky proposed.

            Although I’m not in any way shape or form a Trot, I can understand and appreciate some of his thinking.

            You reject those ideas about equality of genders.

            Is that enough of a political statement about your beliefs and how you conduct them – or are you going to run away again and hide under a rock while throwing out ridiculous insults?

            Let’s face it, Bill, your Achilles Heel has always been about your relationship to women and nothing to do with the political dogma you can trot out (no pun intended) to rile up Americans whohave no real experience of your kind of politics.

            I’m European and I am not afraid of your vaguely ideological stances.

            I’m asking you to address an essential failure in your – for want of a better word – ‘politics’.

            The fact that you have refused constantly to defend your hatred of women suggests that your politics are pretty worthless.

          • TimCA

            OMG! Maybe you HAVE discovered an Achilles Heel!! It’s been four plus hours and he hasn’t circled back to respond. That’s incredibly out of character for him. lol

          • Bill_Perdue

            I take my time with half witted racists like him and dimwitted reactionaries like you. There’s no hurry – you’ll both end up in the dumpster of history.

          • TimCA

            Nice seeing you again too. Take care, Mr. Perdue.

          • Bill_Perdue

            People who voted against your favorite racist did so because we abhor racism, unlike you UKIPpigbois. Your attempts to vilify us makes you even more irrelevant, troll.

            Comment politically or be ignored, UKIPboi.

          • Oikos

            He is dumb as a hammer and mentally ill to boot.

          • Bill_Perdue

            oinker is for racism, wars of aggression and is a scab. oinker opposes ENDA and socialized medicine. That’s why he voted Democrat and/or Republican

          • JT

            You are vile, contemptible, lying, cowardly Nazi collaborator scum and you know it.. Your hypocritical anti-war bullshit has got you Mad Dog Mattis and your Nazi lord and master, “we have nukes to use them” Drumpf, to endanger the world. Your hypocritical faux pro-worker bullshit and mindless false equivalences have got you the American Hitler as your overlord.

          • Bill_Perdue

            jt is for racism, wars of aggression and is a scab. jt opposes ENDA and socialized medicine. That’s why he voted Democrat and/or Republican

          • JT

            You are vile, contemptible, lying, cowardly Nazi collaborator scum and you know it.. Your hypocritical anti-war bullshit has got you Mad Dog Mattis and your Nazi lord and master, “we have nukes to use them” Drumpf, to endanger the world. Your hypocritical faux pro-worker bullshit and mindless false equivalences have got you the American Hitler as your overlord.

          • Bill_Perdue

            jt is for racism, wars of aggression and is a scab. jt opposes ENDA and socialized medicine. That’s why he voted Democrat and/or Republican https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a6117aefaa0825a30cc295acdca0aae754905c6455809274e8c2690f2399094a.jpg

          • JT

            You are vile, contemptible, lying, cowardly Nazi collaborator scum and you know it.. Your hypocritical anti-war bullshit has got you Mad Dog Mattis and your Nazi lord and master, “we have nukes to use them” Drumpf, to endanger the world. Your hypocritical faux pro-worker bullshit and mindless false equivalences have got you the American Hitler as your overlord.

          • Bill_Perdue

            jt is for racism, wars of aggression and is a scab. jt opposes ENDA and socialized medicine. That’s why he voted Democrat and/or Republican https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e09a73231d68b45b84b2ea0e3fba395260358195f23600f2831a545209cfe204.jpg

          • JT

            You are vile, contemptible, lying, cowardly Nazi collaborator scum and you know it.. Your hypocritical anti-war bullshit has got you Mad Dog Mattis and your Nazi lord and master, “we have nukes to use them” Drumpf, to endanger the world. Your hypocritical faux pro-worker bullshit and mindless false equivalences have got you the American Hitler as your overlord.

          • Bill_Perdue

            jt is for racism, wars of aggression and is a scab. jt opposes ENDA and socialized medicine. That’s why he voted Democrat and/or Republican
            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/76c57ffa3b9a67df7055dba89838440e131199090494d05b34de74d1ff9b32a9.jpg
            jt is a pig

          • JT

            You are vile, contemptible, lying, cowardly Nazi collaborator scum and you know it.. Your hypocritical anti-war bullshit has got you Mad Dog Mattis and your Nazi lord and master, “we have nukes to use them” Drumpf, to endanger the world. Your hypocritical faux pro-worker bullshit and mindless false equivalences have got you the American Hitler as your overlord.,

          • Bill_Perdue

            jt is for racism, wars of aggression and is a scab. jt opposes ENDA and socialized medicine. That’s why he voted Democrat and/or Republican
            jt is a pig
            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d19a5eb2118c30ffd44449db7c267ad434c10fde15d8e9977c62843fd17eef8b.jpg

          • JT

            You are vile, contemptible, lying, cowardly Nazi collaborator scum and you know it.. Your hypocritical anti-war bullshit has got you Mad Dog Mattis and your Nazi lord and master, “we have nukes to use them” Drumpf, to endanger the world. Your hypocritical faux pro-worker bullshit and mindless false equivalences have got you the American Hitler as your overlord..

          • Bill_Perdue
          • JT

            You are vile, contemptible, lying, cowardly Nazi collaborator scum and you know it.. Your hypocritical anti-war bullshit has got you Mad Dog Mattis and your Nazi lord and master, “we have nukes to use them” Drumpf, to endanger the world. Your hypocritical faux pro-worker bullshit and mindless false equivalences have got you the American Hitler as your overlord.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Never wrestle with Trumpanzee swine like JT. You just get dirty and JT won’t stop channeling Trump

          • JT

            You are vile, contemptible, lying, cowardly Nazi collaborator scum and you know it.. Your hypocritical anti-war bullshit has got you Mad Dog Mattis and your Nazi lord and master, “we have nukes to use them” Drumpf, to endanger the world. Your hypocritical faux pro-worker bullshit and mindless false equivalences have got you the American Hitler as your overlord..

          • JT

            You are vile, contemptible, lying, cowardly Nazi collaborator scum and you know it.. Your hypocritical anti-war bullshit has got you Mad Dog Mattis and your Nazi lord and master, “we have nukes to use them” Drumpf, to endanger the world. Your hypocritical faux pro-worker bullshit and mindless false equivalences have got you the American Hitler as your overlord.

  • zhera

    The only way the EC can change the election is by voting for Clinton. But they won’t do that.

    • Moebym, Resistance Pilot

      True that.

    • BobSF_94117

      No, if enough vote for a third candidate (or many candidates) and Trump fails to reach the majority, it goes to the House. What a shit storm that will be…

      • Kate

        Not really. They would nominate Trump, and that would be that. They wouldn’t want to, but the alternative would rip the party apart. The republicans are evil, not stupid.

  • Mark

    I thought I recognized that name. Suprun is in the Dallas area…and at one time he was going to resign from his position of Elector. While I saw several others comment that to resign was cowardly – I, too, added my voice to his page.

    If he just resigned (instead of drinking the GOP Koolaid) a new apppointee would simply do what he didn’t want to do.

    I applaud him for standing his ground, for standing up, and in standing FOR the preservation of these American ideals!.

    • thatotherjean

      May his tribe increase!

      • Palmer

        Is that you, Abou?

  • david fairfield

    Stay tuned for rethugs hiring expensive lawyer types to find a loophole on the state by state voting, halting it until after Trump takes office. Or something.

  • Mark Neé Fuzz

    Let’s talk semantics. “Unqualified” is really not an adequate term for Trump as president. It’s too benign. “Unfit” comes a little closer. “Total fucking disaster” is almost there.

    • Mark

      FUBARRR –
      fucked up beyond all respect, recognition, redemption

    • He presents a future so dead the Mormons are baptizing it.

    • Ernest Endevor

      The word you’re looking for is ‘bonkers’. He’s insane. He is chaos. He degrades everything he touches. Our future president and first lady. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/92e896e98d3b5f0f615b1aa8696c758e1965f0b7e662ecd9f0298785b1993bdf.jpg

      • Dazzer

        The Fabulous Baker Brothers and Michelle Pfeiffer did it better.

      • Too much gold. There’s such a thing as “overdone”. I know I was supposed to notice the boobs first but … well, you know.

        • Dazzer

          HAHAHAHAHAAHAAHA!

      • Menergy

        what ever is that puny baby grand doing in the setting of pomp and glitter???? Sheesh – the Trumps are slipping!

        • Ernest Endevor

          But it’s white. So it’s classy. I think it’s hilarious that we’re supposed to believe that he can play it.

        • Amanda B. Rekendwith

          The piano is sized to his fingers.

    • Amanda B. Rekendwith

      Unhinged.

  • HZ81

    Voting this asswipe President is a dereliction of duty.

  • KnownDonorDad

    I’m curious to see if this election will have as many “faithless electors” as we’ve had in our history in previous elections combined. There’s one Washington elector who won’t vote for Clinton, as well. On top of the general bizarre behavior of Trump, we’re more divided as a nation than any time since the Reconstruction.

    • Moebym, Resistance Pilot

      There’s another Dem elector (in Colorado) who’s refusing to vote for Clinton.

      • Capritaur

        Neither of them is voting for Trump, though. Electing Clinton through EC is entirely hopeless. The more practical (but still improbable) outcome would be to deny Trump 270 EC votes (step one) and the Republican-controlled house elects someone who received the 3rd highest number of EC votes who will have to be Republican as well.

    • AW

      Is that still true? Is he still not voting for Clinton?

  • The Return of Traxley

    O/T: The shitgibbon is coming back here to the local white trash Thunderdome to revel in the adulation and worship of the shrieking yokelry.

    It’s not known if he’s bringing along Betsy DeVos. Probably not, since she hasn’t mingled with the common poors since 1973.

    http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2016/12/trump_coming_to_grand_rapids_f.html

  • Moebym, Resistance Pilot

    Not that it’s going to change anything, but bravo for at least understanding the significance of your role. Now if only your fellow electors will have a similar epiphany before 12/19.

    OT: The author of the following article is basically saying that the Taiwan call is a brilliant move. I’m at a loss as to what to think.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trumps-taiwan-call-wasnt-a-blunder-it-was-brilliant/2016/12/05/d10169a2-bb00-11e6-ac85-094a21c44abc_story.html?tid=sm_tw&utm_term=.912bdda00d85

    • Earl

      If you want the civil war between China and Taiwan to be ended, it’s a brilliant move. I’d call it an evil move, but that’s me.

    • Steverino

      I’m all for improved relations with Taiwan (full disclosure: the university library and I as the Library Events Coordinator at the time hosted a traveling exhibit sponsored by their Cultural Ministry for the Year of the Monkey twelve years ago), and its move as a progressive democracy moving toward marriage equality is certainly exciting. As far as this article is concerned though, consider the source. As the article notes, the author (Marc Thiessen) is a hack, er, fellow with the American Enterprise Institute (a conservative think tank, an oxymoron if there ever was one) and was the former chief speechwriter for George W. Bush, so go figure. I became suspicious as soon as the author noted the hearty approval of John Bolton for Trump’s move, followed by the rather smarmy tone of the article, including getting a dig at Obama for his move toward detente with Cuba.

      If this ends well, then broken clock, and all that. Brilliant? No. Belligerent? Yes.

      • TrollopeReader

        Thiessen is also a huge supporter of waterboarding.

      • Moebym, Resistance Pilot

        Thanks for providing some perspective. That pretty much explains everything.

  • BlindBill

    At this point, tRump need only quietly demonstrate to members of the electoral collage that he can reward them with wealth (for them) or ruin them – based on how they vote on December 19 ….. it would take less than what he paid to make the tRump University legal issue go away

    • (((GC)))

      Unfortunately you may be right — but if a few of those electors expose those “quiet demonstrations” it could spell the end of Republican support for him, even if he takes office.

  • clay

    uhh, “For me, America is that shining city on a hill that Ronald Reagan envisioned.”
    Ronald Reagan must have been a few hundred years older than I remember him.

  • ByronK

    269 to go…

    • canoebum

      To survive, the country only needs 37 to switch. That would deny Der Herr 270, and he would not become President.

      • Tiger Quinn

        I would love to believe that 37 other souls are reading those words and reaching the same conclusion.

      • (((GC)))

        Much better if enough electors switch their votes to give Hillary Clinton 270.

        Without an electoral college majority, it would go to the House choosing one of the top three electoral-vote-getters — so it could still be tRump. (That election is done with one vote per state delegation.)

  • Megrim Twist

    “Fifteen years ago, I swore an oath to
    defend my country and Constitution against all enemies, foreign and
    domestic. On Dec. 19, I will do it again.”
    goosebumps …

  • Robincho

    His opinion of Shrub in the days following 9/11 is idiotic, but his conclusion about Drümpf is anything but. I applaud him, and may he prove highly contagious…

    • Megrim Twist

      However, immediately after 9/11, I felt we were all desperate for the President to speak to us, to help us, to calm us, to bring us together. At least Dubya did his duty in that. (I’m not defending him, I’m just relaying my experience). When I think that we might have to *rely* on Cheetolini in that way after a similar incident, I nearly vomit.

      • Mark

        Now, Now. You know Trump will tweet out his intended revenge.

      • Robincho

        Let me amend my Shrub remark slightly. He took the planetary goodwill that was shown us in the early days on a sterling silver platter surrounded by watercress. He took that and squandered it like a drunken sailor on shore leave…

        • Megrim Twist

          100% agree.

        • Oikos

          Mission accomplished.

      • BobSF_94117

        I’m sorry, but when you know how Dubya ignored the warnings, how he wanted to immediately and utterly without justification, destroy Iraq, all his words about 9/11 mean nothing.

        • canoebum

          A lot of that was Cheney, Shrub’s evil Svengali.

      • Tiger Quinn

        WHAT. What is this revisionist crap. Bush did NOT calm us, or barely even address us. It was all “Yee ha we’re going to war!”

      • greenmanTN

        What I remember is really wanting to pull together after the attack and we (or at least I) didn’t really know what to do. I mean during WWII there were all these projects to unify the country, collecting and donating tires, metal, or whatever. So what can you do? As a gay man I couldn’t donate blood and the blood banks were overwhelmed anyway.

        Just a day or two after the attacks I was in the car listening to the radio and the recommendation from the government was to plan a trip somewhere and buy a plane ticket because the airline industry was suffering. Really? That’s it?

        Then maybe a week or two weeks later Pat Robertson or one of the other usual idiots was blaming the attack on gays and lesbians, saying that we “brought it on the country.”

        Unity as I recall was very short-lived.

  • TimCA

    Donald Trump represents a threat to democracy and the Constitution itself. It can’t possibly be any clearer than that.

    • another_steve

      What we’re seeing, I think, is a kind of coup. A subversion of government so severe that it categorizes as a coup.

      White nationalists and theofascists have teamed up to subvert American democracy, and Donald Trump is their chosen handmaiden.

    • Kate

      How does he represent a threat to democracy?

      Deporting non-citizens wasn’t a threat when Obama did it, and it won’t be when he does it.

      Registering temporary residents from high-risk countries wasn’t a threat when Bush did it, and it won’t be when Trump does it.

      Fighting back against currency manipulation by tariffing China wasn’t a threat when Clinton said she would do it, and it’s not when Trump will do it.

      The president appointing SCOTUS nominees wasn’t a threat when Obama appointed liberal justices who wanted to interpret it the way he wanted – it won’t be when Trump appoints constitutional originalists.

      Where is this threat you speak of? We survived Bush. We survived Obama. We’ll survive Trump.

      • Oikos

        Downvoted for stupidity.

        • david fairfield

          Upvoted for downvoting for stupidity. Add LOL.

        • Tiger Quinn

          You two Mean Girls just DREAM of a day when you have your own board, don’t you.

          • TrollopeReader

            down voted on principle.

        • Kate

          Speaking of stupidity, have you noticed that there isn’t a single downvote on any comment other than your own downvotes? Have you stopped to consider why?

          Disqus eliminated the downvote some time ago. It doesn’t do anything, but they left the button so that people who don’t pay attention could click it to make themselves feel better.

        • Bill_Perdue

          Three oinks for that.

      • another_steve

        Kate, this whole Trump thingy is an obvious theofascist takeover attempt. Look at who he’s nominating for the nation’s highest positions.

        Are you familiar with theofascism and its goals?

        • Kate

          Yes, I am. My family ran in that crowd. As an atheist, they scare me.

          Trump made a deal with the devil in selecting his VP, and in agreeing to work to eliminate the bans on religious lobbying. It’s arguably my biggest problem with him. There were other concerns that mattered more to me.

          We now know that Citigroup picked Obama’s cabinet for him. He asked for minorities and women, and they came up with a list. It’s in Wikileaks. It wasn’t good then, and it’s not good now.

      • ChrisInKansas

        I don’t want to “survive”, I want to thrive. I can’t believe people like you think you are rational.

      • TimCA

        Deliberately undermining our democratic institutions is an attack on our democracy. Trump’s continuing statements that the free expression of the will of the american electorate is illegitimate is an attack on our democracy. Trump’s baseless lie that he has in fact won the popular vote is an attack on our democracy. Trump’s stated support for laws limiting US citizens from freely exercising the franchise is a direct attack on democracy. Threatening, bullying and attempting to intimidate and silence the press is an attack on democracy. Threatening to throw political opponents into jail is an attack on democracy. Threatening sitting judges who are adjudicating cases that involve him is an attack on our democracy and constitutional guarantees. Stopping women from exercising their constitutional right of privacy is an attack on constitutional rights. Saying that there will be a religious test as to whether a person, even US citizens, can freely enter the country and stating that citizens who elect to practice the religion of their choice should be singled out for surveillance based simply on that religion is an attack on our Constitution and the rights it conveys. Saying he wishes to strip US citizenship away from people based solely upon where their parents are from is an attack on our Constitution and democracy. Stating that he’d order the military to violate the law and if they refuse he’d simply get “different generals” to carry out his illegal orders is an attack on our democracy. I could go on.

        I believe that the Trump presidency represents an existential threat to democratic norms in this country. So go ahead Kay, Kate or whatever name you’re posting under today, feel free to keep shilling for your authoritarian demi-god. I’m not biting.

        • Kate

          “Deliberately undermining our democratic institutions is an attack on our democracy.”

          How has he done that?

          “Trump’s continuing statements that the free expression of the will of the american electorate is illegitimate is an attack on our democracy.”

          And how has he done that? He’s commented on how fraud is a potential in the election.

          “Trump’s baseless lie that he has in fact won the popular vote is an attack on our democracy.”

          Whether he believes that he’s won the popular vote is entirely irrelevant, for the same reason that the popular vote is irrelevant. The US is not, and has never been, a direct democracy. The people elect a leader indirectly, as is the case all over the world. In Canada, for example, you vote for your local MP, and the prime minister is not directly elected at all. That doesn’t make their government an attack on democracy.

          “Trump’s stated support for laws limiting US citizens from freely exercising the franchise is a direct attack on democracy.”

          He has never done so. He has criticized felons voting. The fifteenth amendment says nothing about criminality.

          “Threatening, bullying and attempting to intimidate and silence the press is an attack on democracy.”

          Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of the press. That doesn’t mean that they are above criticism, any more than the president is. They attack him, he attacks back. Opening up libel laws would not be an attack on democracy, either – if you can prove the statements are intentionally false, they lose a lot of their constitutional protection.

          “Threatening to throw political opponents into jail is an attack on democracy.”

          Threatening to appoint prosecutors to investigate actual crimes is not. We know, absolutely, without question, that she mishandled classified information. She emailed classified info to her uncleared maid, for fucks sake. She should have gone to jail. Petraeus should have gone to jail. Investigating her for that is not an attack on democracy – she had no business being a candidate in the first place.

          “Threatening sitting judges who are adjudicating cases that involve him”

          It would be, but he didn’t do that. He commented on how the heritage of a judge could affect his personal biases, particularly given his affiliation with a racial advocacy group. He’s far from the only person to make that kind of speculation – just ask the New York Times:

          “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,” — Judge Sotomayor

          She felt that a Latina would make different decisions and rulings based on her heritage and experience. Why is Donald Trump not permitted to agree with her? In the La Raza law journal (you know, the one from the organization the judge was associated with), she states:

          “Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences,” she said, for jurists who are women and nonwhite, “our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.”

          So, it’s an attack when Donald Trump says that, but not when she does? Double standard much?

          “Stopping women from exercising their constitutional right of privacy is an attack on constitutional rights.”

          The right to privacy is not an enumerated right. While rights not enumerated in the constitution are reserved to the states and to the people, the state does have an interest in promoting the general welfare, including by prohibiting the killing of it’s citizens. There is a constitutional case to be made that abortion is wrong, and that the government has a legitimate purpose in protecting the life of it’s citizens.

          It’s not like gay marriage, where one has to balance the rights of gay people to get married against the right of other people not to like it – in this case it’s the literal life of a human versus the body of the mother.

          “Saying that there will be a religious test as to whether a person, even US citizens, can freely enter the country”

          There is a difference between a religious test and interviewing people coming from high-risk countries believe that women should be relegated to second-class status, and whether they believe that religious law should supersede secular law. Temporary residents do not have the same rights as citizens, and immigration is a privilege, not a right. The United States is legally, and morally, able to prohibit entry to those who support terrorist or religious supremacist organizations, whether that organization is muslim or not.

          “stating that citizens who elect to practice the religion of their choice should be singled out for surveillance based simply on that religion”

          The program he’s talking about involves registration for temporary residents from high-risk countries. Those countries may be majority muslim, but the registration requirements apply to everyone from those countries, regardless of their personal religion. It’s not a religious test, and it does not apply to citizens. Immigration is, again, a privilege, and many countries have strict surveillance requirements for lawful temporary residents.

          “Saying he wishes to strip US citizenship away from people based solely upon where their parents are from is an attack on our Constitution and democracy.”

          He hasn’t said that. What he has stated is that he wants to return to the original definition of the fourteenth amendment, which states “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof“. If the law was simply to cover everyone born in the US, there would be no point to the second part (much like the second amendment and the “well-regulated militia” part).

          If you look to the enabling legislation (passed by the same congress that passed the 14th amendment), you will see a clearer version:

          “All persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power

          In other words, anyone who wouldn’t be a dual citizen (slaves, mainly) automatically got citizenship at birth. It was designed to exclude transients, and other temporary residents. It excluded people from foreign countries for a long time.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthright_citizenship_in_the_United_States#Statute.2C_by_birth_within_U.S.

          A supreme court case changed the interpretation. It can change it back. Wanting to restore the original, historically understood definition is not an attack on democracy.

          “Stating that he’d order the military to violate the law and if they refuse he’d simply get “different generals” to carry out his illegal orders is an attack on our democracy.”

          That might be war crimes, but it’s not an attack on democracy. The constitution names the president commander and chief, and establishes how war is authorized. It’s rather silent on the specific methods one uses to kill the enemy. The US government is required to follow the US constitution on US territory. When fighting an enemy overseas, international law (and the ability and willingness of other countries to enforce it) is what matters.

          ” I could go on.”

          You undoubtedly could. If you go on enough, you might actually come up with a genuine reason, rather than simply a list of reasons you dislike him.

    • Bill_Perdue

      “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. “HL Mencken
      Tone down the hysteria.

  • Jerry Kott

    Trump is beyond even faking sanity. This creature is truly a danger.

    • ByronK

      I think everyone in opposition kind of expected it to be a mess, but this is off the chart!!! More and more, I think he cannot be allowed to take the office or things more horrible than anyone imagined will happen.

      • Jerry Kott

        He is a truly disturbed creature-off the rails. He has damaged the US and now it is just a matter of degrees

    • another_steve

      I think he’ll self-destruct early in his presidency. Do something either overtly criminal or bordering on criminality.

      I think he’ll resign rather than risk being impeached.

      • canoebum

        That would give us Pence, not good, but at least Pence is predictable, unlike Trump, who is stone cold crazy. With Pence at least, we know what we’re getting.

        • another_steve

          Pence is today’s Republican voter’s wet dream. Articulate. Experienced. Handsome. Suave. Deeply “religious.”

          The pressure to get Trump out and Pence in will be great among the Republican establishment ranks.

          • canoebum

            I’ll go along with experienced and deeply religious, but the rest, sorry, no. The has the charm and looks of an insurance salesman, and is about as articulate as Rainman.

        • Pence is an intellectual door stop. He will do what Ryan wants. I would actually rather have Trump who might be manipulated by Schumer and his pretty son in law to be a bit moderate — who knows? Also Trump does not like to be anyone’s bitch — and Pence would be Ryans. He was in the past as part of Ryan’s “young guns” in Congress.

          • canoebum

            Pence was also part of the Gingrich Cabal and their infamous Contract on America.

      • Jerry Kott

        wonder what the bookies are saying? We are beyond repairing anything with a bandaid. He is redefining madness

        • another_steve

          During the campaign, several experts in the area of mental illness and its manifestations critiqued Trump’s behaviors — the tweeting in the middle of the night, his speech and facial mannerisms, etc. — and concluded that Trump did seem to display some of the classic signs of mental/emotional instability.

          This is no joke.

          We may be ushering in a President of the United States next month who is neither mentally nor emotionally fit to hold that office.

          • Jerry Kott

            I believe it is true, a classic sociopath. What I have been reading lately is that he can’t read. That is why he is not comfortable with a teleprompter. He may be able to read but I suspect he can comprehend.

  • KnownDonorDad
  • Mark

    Questions:
    Do electors have the ‘choice’ to simply not cast their vote?….or is it that they must vote for the runner up if they don’t vote for the primary winner?….or can they cast their vote for someone else?

    • Oikos

      I think they can vote for anyone.

      • BobSF_94117

        They can vote for anyone who meets the Constitutional requirements for the presidency (35 years of age, natural born citizen, etc.).

    • MusicBear88

      I think it varies wildly state to state.

      • BobSF_94117

        States may pass statutes requiring electors to vote a certain way, but they do not supersede the constitutional duties and privileges. A state may punish an elector with a fine but it cannot control how the elector votes.

    • Natty Enquirer

      No one can force an elector to vote or to vote for a particular person. However, many states impose a fine of a few thousand dollars on electors who do not vote for their pledged candidate. There will also be repercussions in the elector’s business and social life.

      • BobSF_94117

        Free beers for life, for example.

        • Natty Enquirer

          Yes, in the instant circumstance, their social circle may actually improve.

    • I believe two states, Michigan and Minnesota, will remove any elector that does not vote for the winner of the state’s electoral votes. Those are the only two that guarantee a result. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector

    • IamM

      They don’t have to vote for anyone.

      If they don’t manage to elect someone with a majority, the House gets to elect the President and if the EC doesn’t choose a VP the Senate gets to.

  • Jean-Marc in Canada

    If only more Electors took the oath and the duty as seriously.

  • MikeBx2

    More of this, please.

  • DoctorDJ
  • Cuberly

    Ok, I’m going to allow myself a moment of fantasy. Where the electorate doesn’t vote for Dahnald & Hillz wins. Can you imagine the implosion from the GOP, alt-right-nazis, but best of all the humiliation heaped on Dumpster? he he he…

    Ok, now back to our regularly schedule daily horror show.

  • EweTaw

    Is this the same elector who lives in Washington state who was making similar noises two weeks ago?

    • TrollopeReader

      no …this is a Texan.

  • The electoral college was designed to protect the American body politic against an obvious mistake assuming the presidency. I cut and paste from Wiki——–
    American founding father Alexander Hamilton writing to Jefferson from the Constitutional Convention argued of the fear regarding the use of pure direct democracy by the majority to elect a demagogue set out to harm the minority rather than work for the benefit of all citizens. As articulated by Hamilton, one reason the Electoral College was created was so “that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.” https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/98508bbe01b4f95da880c9ded0d0936e088c0c2aad278674ccc2172ffc90a989.jpg

    • Tiger Quinn

      I stopped reading at “I cut and paste from Wiki.” Come ON.

      • Etranger

        Here you go – from the Federalist paper #68 itself:

        The process of election affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications. Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States. It will not be too strong to say, that there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters pre-eminent for ability and virtue. And this will be thought no inconsiderable recommendation of the Constitution, by those who are able to estimate the share which the executive in every government must necessarily have in its good or ill administration. Though we cannot acquiesce in the political heresy of the poet who says: “For forms of government let fools contest That which is best administered is best,” yet we may safely pronounce, that the true test of a good government is its aptitude and tendency to produce a good administration.

        https://www.congress.gov/resources/display/content/The+Federalist+Papers#TheFederalistPapers-68

  • Natty Enquirer

    Well who knows? The populace surprised us with the election. Perhaps the College will surprise us with its decision.

    • And the end result will be a literal civil war and armed insurrection in the streets and gays, blacks, immigrants, muslims, and anyone who does not look white is going to be an immediate potential casualty. Trump won the election — if he is going to be removed from office let Congress do it. If he is not installed on election day everyone here better look as straight as possible if you live outside a Northern City Center — and keep your mouth shut about politics if it ever comes to that.

      • Tiger Quinn

        If you want to stay home, knock yourself out, but freedom is worth fighting for.

      • Treant

        “And the end result will be a literal civil war and armed insurrection…”

        Worth it! I suspect the end result of toeing the line will be a nuclear war and tens of millions dead.

  • andrew

    I guess we only need 36 other Trump electors to defect.

  • Oikos

    Troll warning below:
    Kate and Bill Perdue are trolling. Both are worth blocking.

    • Tiger Quinn

      Long time done.

    • Lazycrockett

      Those boring assholes are still around?

      • TrollopeReader

        Kate at least has the semblance of having a brain, and an education … usually wrong in opinions, though.

    • Joe in PA

      I actually enjoy picking my jaw up off the floor after I read what they have to say. Yikes.

      • TrollopeReader

        bending exercises are good for your health !!

        • Joe in PA

          Well there’s that. 🙂

    • Cuberly

      I could at least cull some info from Kate’s posts here and there. Barring her jarringly cynical tone of course. But alas, last few times she’s visited she’s effectively turned into a blase trump apologist. Just as all Trump backers will be forced to do as their fearless leader implodes & destroys discourse.

      As much as I don’t like to block people on JMG, yeah. I went for it.

      Bill on the other hand is pure entertainment, and he does make some worthwhile contributions now and again.

    • Bill_Perdue

      Oinker is a hilbot troll who refuses to accept the idea that his blocking is an admission of his own inability to think and his own cowardice. He afraid to argue. Thanks for the block, oinker.

      • TrollopeReader

        once an ass, always an ass. typical of the undereducated, as you are.

        • Bill_Perdue

          Troolreader is a hilbot scumbag to accept the idea that he’s unable to think and has to resort to silly personal attacks that make him even more irrelevant.

          • TrollopeReader

            *sigh* At least I’ve some that love me on this site. You — not so much. And no, I was never a “Hillbot” … but i tend to respect the office of the presidency, care about my country — and it’s 320 million or so inhabitants, and the good the nation can do for the people and the world.

            But then again. I use my education for useful purposes, as was intended.

          • Bill_Perdue

            Troolreader is a hilbot scumbag to accept the idea that he’s unable to think and has to resort to silly personal attacks that make him even more irrelevant.

          • TrollopeReader

            um … .you’re lack of logic, sentence construction, and weak educational background are readily apparent in that “sentence” .

          • Bill_Perdue

            Troolreader is a hilbot scumbag who accepts the the idea that he’s unable to think and has to resort to silly personal attacks that make him even more irrelevant.

    • Treant

      Both are already blocked. The relative silence is very nice indeed.

  • Lazycrockett
    • If Hillary, Bernie, and Joe end up running again the Democrats need to find youthful candidates under the age of 70 to run. (note- major sarcasm)

      • Bob Conti
        • DaddyRay

          I can get behind him… or in front of him… or under him…

          • Treant

            Or between him and his boyfriend…

          • another_steve

            There’s no justice in the universe. None.

            Look at who the Canadians have as their Prime Minister, and compare that to the Orange Menace who’s about to become our President.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/037f1d51cdacd0490adfe8833bfae48701049d51982a254ecf2cbc95d7b94659.jpg

          • DaddyRay

            If the US is going to continue to elect unqualified bozos they could at least elect ones that are nice to look at.

          • another_steve
          • Dazzer

            Oh God no. He’s a bit of a prick. Seriously, he’s got as much charm as a fourteen year old brick of rancid cheese. He’s not popular in Spain and he’s not popular in all the safari places where he kills animals.

            He’s not even worth a hate-fuck.

          • another_steve

            When I was sexually active with men other than my husband of today, it was never my policy to request to see their university transcripts before engaging in the nasty with them. Or to first examine their popularity in society. Or to first question whether they were kind to animals. Or whether they were nice to their mothers and always remembered them on their birthdays.

            I realize all the gay men reading here take care to question and examine those things, but I am, alas, deficient in this regard.

            😉

          • DaddyRay

            Justin Trudeau is the whole package: Smart, Compassionate and Sexy

        • another_steve

          It would be so nice to have another President of the United States who I could jerk off to.

          • DaddyRay

            There really needs to be a bathing suit round for elected officials – it would totally change the look of Congress

          • another_steve

            Hillary looked presidential to me. I was easily able to see her in that role.

            Donald Trump looks to me like someone who belongs in a straitjacket.

          • DaddyRay

            She was the most qualified candidate for President this country has ever had.

          • another_steve

            I made that exact point the other day, in a comment.

            An involved, activist First Lady who understood Washington and the White House. A senator of a large U.S. state with a huge economy. A Secretary of State.

          • DaddyRay

            As well as a lawyer and civil rights activist. Hillary dedicated her life to service to the people of this country and the republicans attacked her from the moment she took to the national stage.

          • Bob Conti

            Sounds like a good campaign slogan…

      • SoCalGal20

        Joe is Bernie’s age. He’ll be 78 in 2020. How about Michelle Obama runs and Dr. Jill can be Veep?

        • TimCA

          Upvoted despite the Dr. Jill part.

          • SoCalGal20

            Dr. Jill BIDEN!!! LOL

          • TimCA

            I now withdraw any previous reservation! LOL!!

  • Sam_Handwich

    Interesting he’s from Texas. Can we expect some defections from Ohio, Utah, PA, FL, MI? I hope they are all taking their constitutional duty as deliberative, not ceremonial.

  • Sam_Handwich

    this pisses me off

    electors should unify behind a Republican alternative, an honorable and qualified man or woman such as Gov. John Kasich

    how about fucking your party and voting for the candidate who’s the most professionally qualified one in history, who also won the popular vote by 2.5 million?

    • Oikos

      He claims to care about the constitution but he is still drinking the republican Kool-aid.

      • Sam_Handwich

        seems like he’s not sure about Kasich’s gender

      • Bill_Perdue

        The constitution is anti-democratic. That’s why you like it.

        • Sam_Handwich

          you want direct democracy?

          hold national votes on abortion, desegregation, and gay marriage

          enjoy the results

    • IamM

      Also someone inclined and able to stand up to a Republican power grab.

  • Bob Conti

    The whole electoral college thingy was, among other things, designed to prevent a nincompoop from becoming president, because they didn’t think the unwashed masses really had the wherewithall to be able to elect somebody to the Prez and Veep gigs. Looks like they were amazingly clairvoyant. Wouldn’t that just be a kick in the ass if they denied Hair Furor the White House.

    • Sam_Handwich

      from things i’ve been reading, the EC was likely set up to prevent a slave state candidate from becoming president.

      any criticisms of that theory are welcome, as i do not fully understand the history.

      • Bob Conti

        I’m not sure anyone truly understands the EC. I’ve heard various accounts of why it was set up. I like mine: As a firewall against nincompoopery. I mean, compared to Donald, GWB was freakin’ Teddy Roosevelt.

        • Sam_Handwich

          it makes a tremendous amount of sense on many levels. it also sucks in other areas.

          but if the electors actually do their (unpleasant) job this time, i think Americans would re-embrace the construct

        • j.martindale

          Madison said it was to protect against demagogues. The small states probably saw it in their best interest in dealing with the more populous states. Today, with the party structure, it is merely a way for mountain and rural states to have inordinate political influence.

      • Lazycrockett

        It was basically set up so that the southern states which had a very small % of voters compared to the huge majority % of northern states. This way the Northern states wouldn’t railroad the rest of the country into doing what it wanted. Looking back the North should have railroaded the south and a lot of civil rights issues would have been dealt with a helluva lot earlier.

        • Cuberly

          It was pointed out to me last week that if the electoral college was abolished presidential campaigns would save a lot of money by campaigning in high destiny population areas only. basically campaigning around the edges of the country.

          I see the value of the electoral college and how it’s usefulness has changed over the years. Doesn’t mean I have to like it.

          • BrianQTD

            Someone suggested changing the number of electors per state so that it more fairly represented the population. That might be easier to get than full abolition. Then again, I thought I lived in a sane country.

          • Lazycrockett

            The problem is the losing party always wants to change the system til they become the winning party.

          • BrianQTD

            I don’t know about that. Liberals oppose the EC on principle. If it were the other way around I would feel the same way. Hillary’s victory would be pyrrhic

          • Talisman

            The House has been stuck at 435 representatives since 1929. The population has nearly tripled since then. It’s time for a change.

          • Talisman

            Would that really be any different from now? Under the EC, the candidates spent the majority of their resources in FL, OH, WI, and the other “battleground” states.

          • TrollopeReader

            perhaps it should be mandated that each candidate spend (at least) one full day in each state / district / territory (so, around 55-60 days) … that would at least ensure every state is visited …. (and primary visits don’t count!)

          • Lazycrockett

            Hell yes you talk bout taking this country down a progressive path. I mean just look at NY and CA. This country we be close to democratic socialist union.

    • sfbob

      If that’s the case then the Electoral College has backfired rather spectacularly. It has allowed a minority of the unwashed masses to control the outcome of the election.

  • gaymex1

    ..

  • karen in kalifornia

    Yeah, but who is he voting for? Sorta like the elector in Texas who resigned because he felt he couldn’t in good conscious vote for Trump, unfortunately, he was replaced by someone who will. Oh well.

    • DaMoldBrok

      His statement to the NYT was he will choose John Kasich of Ohio. And ‘prays’ that other electors will do the same.

      • SoCalGal20

        What good does that do? If Trump doesn’t get to 270 that just throws it to the House in which case they choose…Trump?

    • IamM

      Seems to me that with the Republicans controlling Congress they should elect Hillary as a check on them. I suppose the result would be a miserable deadlocked placeholder administration, but it’s better than the alternative.

  • et tu, Pontius?

    • Fritz Keppler

      Ponti. Vocative case.

      • BrianQTD

        Pontiē, right? I mean my Latin is rusty, but could have sworn 2nd declension vocative is -ē.

        • Fritz Keppler

          Almost. When the ending is -ius it’s truncated to -i. So the vocative of Marcus Junius Brutus is Marce Juni Brute.

        • Fritz Keppler

          I thought I had replied to this! True, second declension vocative is -e, but nouns ending in -ius take the ending -i. So the vocative of Marcus Junius Brutus the assassin is Marce Juni Brute.

          • BrianQTD

            Thanks for the reply. As I said my Latin is very rusty.

      • Treant

        Donni in this case. 🙂

  • Jeffrey

    I wish more of them would put their country first. All they have to do is see what Trump is doing. Stacking his team with Wall Street insiders and billionaires and whatever Ben Carson is. Woefully unprepared is an understatement. We’ve already pissed off China and he is still a six weeks away from getting the actual job.

  • boobert

    The electors taking this in their own hands would only make things worse. You couldn’t get to the gun store fast enough for the revolution. I don’t believe trump will be in charge for long. He will either resign or be impeached by the republicans.

    • BrianQTD

      Or die in office quickly. He ain’t in the best shape. See Harrison, William Henry. Also remember that impeachment is just the trial. The removal from office happens after conviction.

      • (((GC)))

        If so, we get President Pence — that’s a terrifying thought! Better for the electors to reject the entire slate. ECpetition.com

      • Talisman

        The House votes to impeach (indict) an executive officer; the Senate (with the Chief Justice presiding) votes to remove the officer from office. The Senate can impose additional sanctions, such as barring the officer from ever serving in public office again. But the impeachment process is *not* a criminal prosecution – the officer is not sent to jail or otherwise punched solely on the fact of the impeachment.

        So long as the dumpster signs the bills sent to him by Congress and supports their agenda, they are going to overlook all the conflicts of interest, self-dealing, self-enrichment, and general bad behavior, especially so long as the American people ignore it all too. They will only move to impeach if the dumpster stops playing ball or does something so egregious that the American people start demanding in no uncertain terms that he needs to go.

        But then we’ll have Pence as President. And he’ll play ball, and support it all – and even push them to pass even worse legislation.

  • Rational

    Very different from the reply I got from a Texas Elector, who has a facebook pagel and ended his email a scripture from Psalms) it says:

    Good Citizen,
    I am sorry that, because I have received more than 40,000 emails, I can no longer personally respond to you. I gave up after about 1200.
    Given that the content is fairly universal, I am comfortable offering this universal response.

    Thank you for your communication and for your passion for the Republic. I prefer writers to rioters.

    Several things merit mentioning. First, you have every right to lobby an elector. I welcome the contact from a fellow American.

    Second, this is not a democracy, it is a republic. The corollary to that fact is that even if the majority did rule, there was no majority winner in this election.

    Many seem to not understand that a “majority” is 50% plus one. To date, Hillary has received a plurality, not a majority.

    Third, the Electoral College does not exist in order to give you a “do over” because you don’t like the results; it exists to preserve the nature of the the republic.

    Finally, your feelings notwithstanding, it is not my duty to care one whit what the plurality or majority of Americans want. My job is to represent the decision of the winning party in the Texas Presidential election.

    It’s not that your feelings don’t matter at all, they just don’t matter here. The law and U.S. Constitution do.

    For those who believe I should change my vote to HRC because of your intense feelings about Donald Trump, surely you must know that for every person who feels you have elected the worst person to ever hold the office, there is another who would have felt exactly the same that had we elected HRC: that she is unfit for office and her husband has committed multiple sexual assaults.

    Nevertheless, I think it safe to say, my good citizen, you would not have agreed with electoral nullification of a Clinton victory. Nor would I.

    This is why we have elections.

    If you disagree with the electoral college concept, and some do, you have the opportunity amend the constitution. But elector nullification is not the answer.

    I will vote my conscience. You need have no fear. I have never intended to do anything more or less.

    Please allow me to illustrate my point from America’s favorite pastime, baseball. In the 1960 World Series the Pirates beat the Yankees 4 games to three. But, the Yankees scored a total of 55 runs while the Pirates could only muster 27 total runs.

    Unfair? No, those are the rules of baseball. We choose the winner of the World Series by number of games won, regardless of the disparity of the total runs. If the rules were different, teams would strategize differently and the result would likely be different. That the Yankees outscored the Pirates in 1960, or that the Cubs tied the Indians in runs scored this year, is nothing more than an interesting statistic.

    In a Presidential campaign, if the rules were different, candidates would strategize differently and the result would likely be different.
    Donald Trump won according to the rules. Everything else, including the popular vote, is merely an interesting statistic.

    Indirect election of the chief executive is the rule under parliamentary forms of government. No one in Canada or the United Kingdom votes for Prime Minister. The election is indirect.

    In closing, I am delighted that many are reading the Federalist Papers. I’ve been reading them for twenty years. They are a fascinating insight into the minds of the framers of the Constitution, aren’t they? The Anti-Federalist papers are equally educational. I recommend them for your reading also.

    Yes, I agree with Hamilton in Federalist 68. No, I do not believe that the election of Donald Trump rises to that level.

    If you have read this far you deserve my thanks, and to know that I do browse for responses. I read them and sometimes respond personally as time allows.

    May God bless America and may God bless the great state of Texas.

    Best regards,
    L. Scott Mann
    Texas Elector, Congressional District 19
    Postscript: Inasmuch as the Electoral College does the business of the People I consider all communications to be the property of the People and may publish some or all without notice to the sender. Threats, and I’ve received more than one, are forwarded to the appropriate law enforcement agency.,

    The following may interest, enrage or encourage you:

    https://www.facebook.com/SandstormScholar/

    http://sandstormscholar.com/emails-electors-reflect-character-hrc-supporters/#sthash.TLreVVpr.qm03mDG0.dpbs

    And for those who think the country has never been in worse condition or that we are on the brink of civil war:
    http://sandstormscholar.com/?p=15899

    “It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to trust in princes.” Psalm 118.9

    • Treant

      He sounds nice. And also like he drinks a lot of Kool-Aid.

      • houstonray

        Red and orange, his two favorite “flavors”

    • JT

      Stop quoting myths and do your fucking job to prevent a tyrant from getting power.

    • Max_1

      So he blindly trusts a self absorbed orange prince…

    • Lazycrockett

      He shots himself in the credibility foot when he starts quoting mythology.

    • another_steve

      To which my Lithuanian grandmother, who escaped the concentration camps by a hair, would say:

      Migulgl zol er vern in a henglayhter, by tog zol er hengen, un bay nakht zol er brenen.

      (He should be transformed into a chandelier, to hang by day and to burn by night.)

    • andrew

      In most elections by the popular vote of the people, it is a plurality of the votes that is required to win. In many races where there are more than two candidates on the ballot, it is often the case where no candidate gets a majority of the votes. The candidate with the most popular votes wins the election. A number of our presidents have been elected with a plurality of the votes.

    • OdieDenCO

      i assume after 40,000 email, again I assume, asking for him to reconsider his vote, he would get a clue.

    • SoCalGal20

      L. Scott Mann points out why there is no point to having electors anymore. Their sole job is to prevent a really bad individual from becoming President and yet here we are. And rather than be from the top intellectual tier, the electors are now just party hacks and people being rewarded for their connections. The guy who wrote the op-ed in the NYT is what electors should be but most fall short.

      Also, Mr. Mann wrong. We live in a Representative Democracy (yes, you can argue if we’re really a Democracy these days but that’s different than the way our government is structured).

    • TuuxKabin

      After all that and you fuckin’ quote Psalms . . . could of saved a lot of time for a lot of us if you’d put your bullshit at the beginning of your ramble.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3HemKGDavw

    • Ore Carmi

      So he doesn’t believe in democracy and fails to consider the ultimate goal of a voting system? Lovely. And I’m completely offended by the comparison to baseball. Choosing our political leaders carries a little more importance than a game. For him to cling so tightly to the arbitrary rules of our electoral system and assign more importance to them than to the will of the people is intellectually limited, anti-democratic, and, in this case, disastrous. Thanks for sharing his response with us, though.

  • justme

    tRumpansee Twitter Shyt storm start tonight And we can expect the surrogates to be out.
    Watch for these 2 https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6739c055878b956896bba460c3bbd09c1ea3265ef620af70599dc7922526a0cc.jpg

  • Lazycrockett

    Well Al Gore is on All In and hes making me think there may be a future after all.

    • houstonray

      Just saw an segment on CNN about it, but missed the first part. It’s my understanding that Gore spoke with Trump at length in a private meeting, about Global Warming and said he made progress? The frak?

      • Lazycrockett

        Well it seems that Ivanka is “committed” to sensible climate policy. shrug.

        • Ore Carmi

          I hope that’s true as well!

        • Ore Carmi

          (But then you have to ask, what does she mean by “sensible?”)

      • Talisman

        The dumpster can be so easily manipulated that you can convince him about one thing at 2:00, and at 2:01, someone can convince him of just the opposite.

      • Ore Carmi

        I hope it’s true!

    • Snarkaholic

      And, in the meantime, we can all enjoy how the Trumpgretters are freaking out on Twitter.

  • houstonray

    Stephen Moore, Trump’s economic advisor, said: “Too many namby-pamby people in the foreign policy shop are saying ‘Oh my gosh we can’t do this, we might insult the Chinese.’ I don’t care if we insult the Chinese. Taiwan is our ally. That is a country that we have backed because they believe in freedom. We ought to back our ally, and if China doesn’t like it, screw ’em.”

    So apparently “SCREW ‘EM” is our new foreign policy…???

  • rednekokie

    Good for him. If only the other electors were as concerned about the country and the constitution as this man.

  • it’s a wonderful to read, but i fear this guy won’t inspire enough other republican electors to do the same. common sense is sorely lacking in that party and anyway, most of them really do believe HRC is the devil. sad, but true.

    • Skeptical_Inquirer

      I can only hope he’s badgering the other electors and saying “I’m a Texan and find this shit a bridge too far.”

    • Platos_Redhaired_Stepchild

      He won’t vote for Clinton. He’ll vote for another Republican.

  • RJ Bone

    OT: And in other news, Trump wasn’t Time’s MOTY.

    Cue Twitter meltdown about failing, corrupt Time magazine in 3… 2… 1…

    • TrollopeReader

      good golly ….who was?

    • Baltimatt

      It’s not yet decided. All we have is the short list, and Trump is on it.

      http://time.com/4589502/person-of-the-year-2016-shortlist/

      Wait for Wednesday morning.

      • OdieDenCO

        true, Narendra Modi has won the popular poll, but the Editor College still needs to vote. it’s like deja vu all over again

        • RJ Bone

          Ohhh, I thought it was done with that article.

          Well then!

      • sdnative1958

        It REALLY needs to be the scientists.

      • houstonray

        Wasn’t Hitler MOTY once? Or twice?

        • Baltimatt

          Yes. The award is not necessarily an honor but simply acknowledging someone who has affected the world for better or for worse .

      • SoCalGal20

        Zuckerberg better not be MOTY.

  • MBear

    Just putting this thing right down….right here. Just putting it down….slowly. Then stepping back slowly…and walking away.

    https://shop.cheetosstore.com/colour-de-cheetos-bronzer#/!

  • fuow

    So, there are still honorable Republicans.

  • Jerry Kott

    What scares me more than Trump is the way the MSM tries to normalizes the crazy fuck, They are reporting one story and we are required to read between the lines of that story. We seem to be driving with our emergency brakes on. We still can move forward but not with any efficiency.
    Every morning I wake up wondering if this is the day he officially goes off beyond any reasonable doubt? He has to go before he reaches the point where he takes all of us with him.

    • safari

      MSM wants a soap opera. It always does.

      I got to talk to a colleague who is also a rep on the city council. I asked specifically about how coverage is based on factions. The problem, I was told, isn’t that there are factions, animus, or emotions. Just differences of opinion. The press needs to spin it as a drama to sell coverage rather than take the time to (be boring and) explain reasoning.

      • Jerry Kott

        Too bad that the big boys are more interested in revenue than public safety. We do the heavy lifting outside the Castle Walls and they sit and count their profits. It is inspiring to read that the digital subscriptions at the NYT are up. But that crowd isn’t the “Reality Show” market they are spinning to.

        • safari

          The NYT is actually on my shit list. The editor issued “rededication” to journalism after the election.
          http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/13/us/elections/to-our-readers-from-the-publisher-and-executive-editor.html

          • Jerry Kott

            Thanks, I missed that, that stinks. I have very little respect for any media at this time. What is the difference between “fake news ” and propaganda?

          • safari

            Fake news is mostly made up. The trick with it is that there is just enough truth to make the rest of the content believable. As for propaganda — it’s everywhere. About a decade ago the press itself reported on how things like the local TV news receives video to air as segments that comes from government or other sources. They look like a typical press piece, but they are made for mass consumption, good or ill.

  • Cuberly

    I’m bad at stock-markety stuff, but maybe brain-bleach futures would be a good investment over the next 4 years.

    https://twitter.com/Green_Footballs/status/805965090860068864

    • safari

      Am I looking at unattractive spawnling and first lady mistake?

      • Cuberly

        Yep. I guess straddling his mom….with a pile of polaroids of her on the sofa.

        • TrollopeReader

          yeah ….but she’s not his real “mom” ….

          • Cuberly

            I don’t think anything is real in that household/asylum.

          • Silver Badger

            ? Please enlighten me. I am not totally understanding your post.

        • Bob Conti

          Like father, like son?

          • Cuberly

            What that poor kid is going to grow up thinking about women is potentially disturbing. Absent father doting mother….(shudder)

          • Bob Conti

            I just threw up in my mouth, a little bit…

          • Cuberly

            Sorry 🙁

          • Stogiebear

            With that double chin Barron’s sporting I’d say you’re correct.

          • Cuberly

            Great to see you here….stranger.

            How’d your binding submission go?

          • Stogiebear

            Needed to take a break to deal with so much estate and personal stuff, thank you for the greeting!

            Got it finished and submitted on time. Judging was in “early November” and announcement of winners will be in January so just waiting to hear. Already moving on to the French competition that’s due next May and the US competition that’s due in January 2018.

          • Cuberly

            Did someone pass away in your family? If so I hadn’t heard. So sorry.

            Well, it’s great to see you here again. Fingers crossed for the news in Jan.

          • Stogiebear

            My father died in mid-August. He’d been sick since the beginning of the year. Between taking care of him and then having to deal with my alcoholic brother during the death-time (he was 20 minutes late to the funeral and drunk…) and following on the estate, it has been wearing me thin. Go to probate court next Thursday to do the prove-up of the will and then things should move along pretty smoothly. It’s ridiculous that in a county of 2.5 millions people that there are only 3 probate judges. A will may be easy to probate here in Texas but it sure as hell isn’t fast.

            Planning on buying my brother out of his half of the house so a few things to take care of with that — like get an inspection and an appraisal so I can make an informed offer to him and have documentation to back it up.

            And on top of that trying to keep abreast of those two other competitions, teaching schedule, and most probably taking on a part-time job actually being employed as binder by one of the talking heads we discuss on here (today even). . . Somebody’s got to pay to put electricity through that red light bulb on my front porch.

            Keep your fingers crossed for me that I win this competition that I’ve sent the binding off to — Daddy needs a new pair of Wranglers!

          • Cuberly

            Oh man, you got it coming and going from all directions. Again, so sorry. I can empathize, having recently gone through a loss like that.

            Be sure to take care of yourself. Sometimes the hard part is realizing when you need time for you. Regroup. I know this may sound hokey, but if there’s the option for hospice counseling in your area, may want to do it. I didn’t take the opportunity for the free counseling after my mom passed and I regret it. I did go see someone twice, thankfully they kept that option open, even after a year. It really did help. But yeah, you’re in the middle of it, maybe not the easiest thing to do right now.

            Hang in there. Not to step out of JMG decorum but if you want to chat I can email you my phone #. If you like.

            Like I said, it’s great to see you back. There’s a great group here that feels the same.

        • djcoastermark

          that is so gross and it creeps me out.

    • Skeptical_Inquirer

      They’re taking this Game of Thrones Lannister/Targaryen thing way too seriously.

      • Cuberly

        Funny you mention that, a friend of mine refers to them as, “The Lannisters”. He never calls them Trumps.

        • zhera

          Tiffany = Tyrion?

    • DaddyRay
      • Cuberly

        Ha!

    • Moebym, Resistance Pilot
      • Cuberly

        Pretty much.

    • Lazycrockett

      That whole family is fucking each other, except for Tiffany.

      • Cuberly

        Sort of a Pharonic or Mid-Roman rule sort of sensibility at work?

        Yeah, it creeps me out.

      • David Milley

        We call the act”The Aristocrats.”

      • Oscarlating Wildely

        Tiffany: Too. Busy. Shopping. Four sales before sundown!
        Four for you,Tiffany! You go, Tiffany!

    • Lazycrockett

      Also look at that god awful tacky shitfest of an apartment. That place would give a migraine.

      • Cuberly

        Picture perfect representation of horror vacui. And yet so much is empty there.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horror_vacui

      • houstonray

        It’s like living inside King Tut’s tomb….

        • thatotherjean

          I’ve been in that. It’s a much classier place than Trump’s apartment.

      • Cuberly

        Funny you mention that. The last time I had migraines was 2003. I’ve had 3 rather big ones since the election. No joke. But then I have other stress going on.

        The Saturday after the election was the worst.

    • houstonray

      Who is that taking the picture? Is that one of the sons?

      • DaddyRay

        Yes

      • Max_1

        Baron… Her son.

      • coram nobis

        Baron Barron, and in profile he looks like Our Leader Dearest.

      • Cuberly

        Sorta makes it even more creepy. And that it’s a professional GettyImage. Yeah, ewww….

    • Treant
    • Talisman
      • Cuberly

        To be honest I really don’t care what Melania did or has done in her prior life.

        Not gonna shame a woman making a living.

        Her spouse, and her compliance within the Trump realm however, yeah, I’ll criticize the fuck out of that.

        • Skeptical_Inquirer

          My problem is less with her being naked than how Trumpeteers (especially the fundie Christians) bitched that Michelle Obama was ugly and wearing a sleeveless dress then don’t say a word about someone who’s not even wearing a bikini.

          • Talisman

            My problem is with the hypocrisy that the Republicans promote a so-called “pro-family” agenda, which includes planks against pornography and homosexuality. And yet, they elect a twice-divorced, admitted adulterer, whose current wife has posed nude – and not just nude, but nude in a lesbian-erotic context.

          • Cuberly

            I hear ya. But, the talibanjelicals have played their hand. They’ll do ANYTHING for access to power. Literally, ANYTHING.

            They’re a bunch of entitled fake bible banging rednecks that think they know more than people that have made measurable accomplishments in their lives work. They think their malleable followers can translated to the rest of the country, um, nope.

  • TrollopeReader

    Lawrence O’Donnell et al are destroying Gen Flynn for the conspiracy theories … so it’s not just the son.

  • Richard B

    If we can get a few more brave souls with the same convictions and flip some of the recount states maybe, just maybe, we can turn this national nightmare around.

  • Lazycrockett

    Full Frontal with Samantha Bee is on Tonight!!!!!!

  • sadoldguy

    I think it’s more likely that this summer or fall there will be a
    tragic accident, or a Andropov like mystery illness.
    The
    fallout will be miserable, but temporary.
    A sobered, pragmatic and terrified Pence or Ryan will emerge for the
    remainder of the term, with little interest or stomach for upsetting
    the status quo.

    • fuow

      I hope to hell you’re wrong, but the odds are you won’t be.

      • sadoldguy

        I am not trying to be pollyannaish.
        But there are a whole bunch of public servants who are not elected and are patriots.
        Marshal law and suspension of civil rites will be awful.
        I think we are all going to have a crappy future.

    • 2guysnamedjoe
      • djcoastermark

        And for that Sir, a martini for you. Would you like that shaken or stirred ?

        • 2guysnamedjoe

          I take it any way I can get it. As the Queen Mum once admonished her staff: “When you two old Queens have finished arguing, this Old Queen wants her Gin.”

        • coram nobis

          From the film:

          James Bond: I always thought M was a randomly assigned initial, I had no idea it stood for …
          M (Dame Judi Dench): Utter one more syllable and I’ll have you killed.
          — “Casino Royale”

          • djcoastermark

            Please don’t get me started on Dame Judy. I just love her, snarky comments and all. Another treasure.

          • coram nobis

            Highly recommend her for two less-well-known films, “Ladies in Lavender” and “Mrs. Henderson Presents.”

          • djcoastermark

            The previews look great with Maggie Smith, Yep. And Mrs. Henderson ” Why Mr. Van Damn, you are Jewish” that I have got to watch. Too funny.

          • coram nobis

            “Ladies in Lavender” also has a young and attractive Daniel Bruhl.

          • jsmukg

            She is one of the greatest actors ever to grace the stage. “Mrs. Brown,” “Notes on a Scandal,” etc…..

        • TuuxKabin

          I’ll take that martini, if you don’t mind, he’s asleep right now, and it just broke daylight. That, and I’m just in the mood. Stirred, three olives if you will. Thank you.

    • BrianQTD

      We already have people thinking Podesta and Clinton run a sex ring out of pizza shop. If Trump dies in office, the conspiracy nuts will be EVEN WORSE.

      • sadoldguy

        Yes. Not civil war, but close, put down with brutal military force.

  • Actually, Ronald Reagan, the so-called Great Communicator (whose “great communication” was to tell gay people to die) was not the first or greatest person to look upon America as a shining city on a hill. That would be Governor John Winthrop who founded Boston as a British colony in 1630, three hundred years or so before Reagan made his dimwitted Bedtime for Bonzo movie, co-starring with a chimp.

    • Earl

      No, it was the chimp who was the star in that movie…

      Everyone in the industry knows that one ought to try and avoid working with children and animals. (paraphrased from someone in the 1930s)

      • F. C. Fields, as i recall)

        • Earl

          I’m not sure he said that, he worked well with children in the 30s; the only man who could get away with kicking a child on screen. 🙂

          • I googled and this is what came up:

            Although one of his most famous quotes is “Never work with animals or children.” he secretly admired children. Has a medical syndrome named after him–“W.C. Fields syndrome”, characterized by rhinophyma (rosacea of the nose) associated with alcoholism.

            W.C. Fields – Biography – IMDb

            http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001211/bio

          • Earl

            Cool, the man was a brilliant actor. Shame about his boozing.

  • bkmn

    A bit of advice – remember that alternative realities make money for Hollywood, including Steve Bannon.

  • Talisman

    Ben Carson as HUD Secretary.

    This administration really is the incompetent leading the incompetent.

  • DaddyRay
  • houstonray

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d54c4bd43b8e3385aeb6b80eb5e36683d564d6e5ad89b9e6ea901dd848f9e451.jpg

    Not sure if this is photoshopped or real but it’s creepy as all hell….

    • DaddyRay

      That is a photoshop right

      • Treant

        Almost certainly…but you did have to ask, so I’m going to say it’s truthy.

        • houstonray

          Post Truth?

      • safari

        Unable to respond. Poe’s law is no longer applicable in this era.

        • coram nobis

          A lot of America will be going to the Poe House this term.

          • TuuxKabin

            Thanks gawds and the lard, one of them is nearby, just uptown in The Bronx.

            http://bronxhistoricalsociety.org/poe-cottage/

          • thatotherjean

            There’s another one, of course, in Baltimore. And Poe’s grave. If you wanted to bring a dozen roses and a bottle of booze to leave there, the mystery man who used to do that hasn’t been by for the last few years. . .

            http://www.poeinbaltimore.org/

          • TuuxKabin

            I like the concept, but the Bronx Cottage is more accessible, and I don’t travel well, or much anymore. Keep close to home. But come spring time it’s worth considering a hop uptown with a bottle of booze and dozen roses. The porch, in The Bronx, looks like a comfortable place to hang out.

          • thatotherjean

            I take it back–there was a new mystery man this year who showed up with cognac and roses at midnight on Poe’s birthday (ain’t Google grand?). So take some booze and roses to the Bronx next Spring, and start a new tradition.

          • TuuxKabin

            With a box of chocolates, from Mondel, up B’dway a few blocks, where Katherine Hepburn had a weekly standing order of chocolates. For years, Hepburn would be driven to Mondel Chocolates to pick up her standing order: pecan turtles, molasses chips, butter crunch, dark orange peel, champagne truffles and dark almond bark. Customers still come in and request the Hepburn mix.

            http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/13/nyregion/mondel-chocolates-shop-in-manhattan.html

    • safari

      “Start just blow the shoulder with a single finger, near the neck, and trace to the nipple. Add one or two more fingers along the way. It’s sensual. Women love it.”

      • DaddyRay

        Or just grab them in the pussy

    • SoCalGal20

      To put everybody’smind at ease (sort of), it’s photoshopped. OTOH I have no idea who that man is that they’re pointing at.

      http://www.gettyimages.com/license/620364128

      And then there’s this photo…

      http://www.gettyimages.com/license/620364140

      • houstonray

        Thank you! I was hoping….

    • coram nobis

      Photoshopped. Our Leader’s index finger has a shadow but Prince Princeling’s doesn’t. Young Dearest Leader is probably pointing at a Google map of Pyongyang and saying maybe ground zero should be … here.

    • Lazycrockett

      “Look Dad we both sucked them” “Can I do what you do to my aunt?”

  • Talisman

    General Petraeus as Secretary of State.

    Sure, after slamming Hillary for being *accused* of mishandling classified information, nominate somehow *proven* to mishandle classified information.

    • Max_1

      Not only proven to mishandle, convicted for it…
      Something Hillary was never charged with.

      • Talisman

        My first draft had “convicted”, but I couldn’t remember if he actually was, and was too lazy to google it, so I changed it.

    • coram nobis

      Snowden on Petraeus: wow, he spilled stuff far more secrety-secret yet he’s a candidate for Secretary of State.

      https://www.yahoo.com/katiecouric/exclusive-snowden-says-petraeus-disclosed-far-more-highly-classified-information-than-i-ever-did-115212222.html

      • Max_1

        Because it’s not when a Republican commits acts of Treason…

        • coram nobis

          Well, of course. IOKIYAR.

          … nor the creation in newsprint of a great public hero, is an invention of our age, which has not seen any betterment of the technique that erected [1st GOP presidential nominee John C.] Frémont into a martyr — a figure of oratory and newsprint. That creation was almost enough to wreck the republic. It was enough to convince innumerable people born since the advertising stopped and its proprietors died, so that you will find it in the instruction given our children — that incompetence is courage, that self-seeking mutiny is statesmanship, that youth and purity of intention — if purity exists in the main chance — qualify a stupid man to lead armies and govern a nation, that martyrdom in headlines erases blunders and nullifies treason, that greatness is a loud noise.
          — Bernard DeVoto, The Year of Decision: 1846 (published 1943)

  • bkmn

    Tony Duggar PerKKKins hitched his star to Trump, very likely completely unaware that Trump could, with a word or two, turn Perkin’s supporters against him. I call that delicious irony.

    I am not in denial that the religious right expects Trump to pay them back for getting him elected but my point is that Trump has a long history of screwing people over and ANYONE that crawls into bed with him does so at their own risk.

  • John Mayor

    With all due respect to this abovenoted Elector, his vote… and, indeed, all 538 Electoral votes!… MAY NOT BE NEEDED! Check out the info at, http://www.foxla.com/good-day/good-day-la-experts-and-other-guests/218882862-story… and, if realized, December 19 may become Hillary Clinton’s new birthday! And, in that event, January 20, 2016, will be an eternity away for Trumpelforeskin!
    .
    Please!… no emails!

  • sherman

    OT-

    Jon Dorenbus, NFL player who was a finalist on America’s Got Talent as a magician. Gave me gay vibes. Now I see this tweet. Gaydar gets a little stronger.

    https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8giNh2D1JgLZ3JveDdvLXdfbFk

  • John Mayor

    With all due respect to this abovenoted Elector, his vote… and, indeed, all 538 Electoral votes!… MAY NOT BE NEEDED! Check out the info at, http://www.foxla.com/good-day/good-day-la-experts-and-other-guests/218882862-story… and, if realized, December 19 may become Hillary Clinton’s new birthday! And, in that event, January 20, 2017, will be an eternity away for Trumpelforeskin!
    .
    Please!… no emails!

  • Cestrum Nocturnum

    Please, Dawg, let the Democrats and Joe Biden pull this off!

    “On January 3, 2017, Democrats will hold the majority in the Senate for a few minutes, until the newly-elected Senators are sworn in. Biden could convene the Senate in those few minutes and call for a vote. The majority could then suspend the rules and vote in Merrick Garland.”

    Crooks and Liars via Wonkette

    http://crooksandliars.com/2016/12/senate-democrats-have-one-shot-saving

    • Skeptical_Inquirer

      Shit, they totally need to get on that.

    • Lazycrockett

      Anything that is a big FU to the GOP Im all for it specially since they are going to embrace everything they denied Obama for the last 6 years.

      • Ninja0980

        Works for me.
        We’ll take the seat that is rightfully ours.

    • billbear1961

      Vote Garland in!

      It is the President’s constitutional duty and RIGHT to appoint a justice to the Court, and the GOP Senate has committed an act of blatant SEDITION by refusing for many MONTHS to obey the Constitution and grant him a hearing!

  • TimCA

    O/T: A little ray of sunshine on an otherwise bleak horizon.

    http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-supreme-court-racial-gerrmander-20161205-story.html

  • John Mayor

    ATTENTION: AS SOMEONE AND/ OR SOMETHING HAS SHUT DOWN THE URL LINK IN MY RESPONSE BELOW THIS ONE, I HAVE THOUGHT TO REPLACE THE URL LINK WITH THE LONGFORM GOOGLE SEARCH RESULT EXPRESSION INSTEAD!… AND, IN ADDITION, I HAVE ADDED HYPHENS BETWEEN THE TEXT, IN CASE SOMEONE AND/ OR SOMETHING HAS MANAGED TO INTERFERE WITH THE LONGFORM VERSION! IN OTHER WORDS, YOU’LL HAVE TO KEY IN THE EXPRESSION IN GOOGLE’S SEARCH BAR MANUALLY!

    .
    With all due respect to this abovenoted Elector, his vote… and, indeed, all 538 Electoral votes!… MAY NOT BE NEEDED! Check out the info at, A-t-t-o-r-n-e-y J-o-h-n B-i-r-k-e c-h-a-l-l-e-n-g-e-s e-l-e-c-t-o-r-a-l c-o-l-l-e-g-e v-o-t-e-s – S-t-o-r-y | K-T-T-V… and, if realized, December 19 may become Hillary Clinton’s new birthday! And, in that event, January 20, (2017), will be an eternity away for Trumpelforeskin!
    .
    Please!… no emails!

  • Deloriswburrell

    Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj214d:
    On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
    !mj214d:
    ➽➽
    ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash214MarketSpaceGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!mj214d:….,…..

  • Skeptical_Inquirer

    OT: a cheerful song called “Always Look on the Bright Side of Life” by Monty Python

    https://youtu.be/SJUhlRoBL8M

  • cokey

    I will now play Prokofieff’s seventh piano sonata.

  • billbear1961
  • Gene Perry

    Great! Now all we need is to convince 20-30 more electors to also switch …

  • lymis

    This is a potentially good sign.

    But just because someone says that as a Republican elector, they won’t vote for Trump, it doesn’t follow that they’ll vote for Clinton.

    What strikes me as more likely is that if enough electors refuse to vote for him, they’ll choose another Republican, and nobody would end up with 270. Which would throw the decision to a vote of the Republican-held House of Representatives.

    They could decide to go with Trump anyway. Only in the wildest fantasies would they go for Hillary. Or they could pick a different Republican they prefer.

  • lymis

    This might be the only way we’d get rid of the Electoral College in our lifetimes.

    If enough electors not only refused to vote for Trump, but also crossed party lines and elected Hillary (the two are not necessarily linked to each other), we’d be in a situation where Democrats were pissed at the Electoral College because it was even an issue, when Hillary won the popular vote, and Republicans would be pissed at it because it didn’t work as planned. That might ring up enough support for changing it.

    Otherwise, pretty much by definition, half the population is happy with the outcome. In this case, Republicans aren’t going to scrap a system that gave them the win even when the popular vote went the other way. And if the situation were reversed and a Democrat won the EC but not the popular vote, most Democrats wouldn’t vote to scrap it either.

  • Ben in Oakland

    At least he is not like the elector who claims that his Christian conscience will not allow him to vote for trump, or anyone.

  • Disqusdmnj

    “That was also the last time I remember the nation united.”

    Yeah, funny thing, that… coming from a Republican. He may be voting a better conscience than most conservatives, but remind me again which party was the one who divided the country?

  • Toniabbarrientes

    Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj141d:
    On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
    !mj141d:
    ➽➽
    ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash141TopDataGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!mj141d:….,……