2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

[Flagg]

Can I repeat that you can only be impeached if you committed a crime whilst in office. Trump isn't in office yet, he couldn't possibly have done that.

Care to show the source of your assumption? Because the text of the constitution doesn't say so, and what little precedent I can find shows that crimes committed before holding office have been involved in some non-Presidential impeachment proceedings.

You've just repeated this multiple times without being called on it. So please back up the claim.

Yeah, I've literally never seen that before. If a President is a serial killer but only killed before being sworn in the idea that he couldn't be impeached is nonsense.

[Dominus Atheos]

There are no restrictions on impeaching a president. If congress wants to impeach one over their shoe size, no one can stop them.

[Raw Shark]

In fact my impression is that by this guy's understanding Bernie Sanders would be more "centralist" than Hillary Clinton, as she seemed more concerned about sexism and gun control than he did.

The thing you've got to understand about Sanders on these subjects is that a) for decades he's represented a socially-liberal Northeastern state where sexism isn't a huge problem (and there's no way he was going to claim that turf from Clinton anyway for an obvious reason), and b) Vermont is pretty rural and gunned-up for New England. Hell, a quarter of the kids on my college campus had at least one firearm, and it was completely against the school's rules. I even had one, and I was a long-haired hippie. One girl I knew had six of them. The gun thing was part of why I thought he would do well in the general if he won the primary. Sanders is definitely not coming for your guns, so he'd be more palatable to the 2nd Amendment single issue voters.

[Flagg]

In fact my impression is that by this guy's understanding Bernie Sanders would be more "centralist" than Hillary Clinton, as she seemed more concerned about sexism and gun control than he did.

The thing you've got to understand about Sanders on these subjects is that a) for decades he's represented a socially-liberal Northeastern state where sexism isn't a huge problem (and there's no way he was going to claim that turf from Clinton anyway for an obvious reason), and b) Vermont is pretty rural and gunned-up for New England. Hell, a quarter of the kids on my college campus had at least one firearm, and it was completely against the school's rules. I even had one, and I was a long-haired hippie. One girl I knew had six of them. The gun thing was part of why I thought he would do well in the general if he won the primary. Sanders is definitely not coming for your guns, so he'd be more palatable to the 2nd Amendment single issue voters.

Yeah, but the NRA wouldn't have endorsed him if he had triple the kills of George Zimmerman and he would be depicted as a no good gungrabber because they attack your strengths. The entire narrative would have been his being more pro-gun control than James Brady and a no good commie to boot

[Raw Shark]

Yeah, but the NRA wouldn't have endorsed him if he had triple the kills of George Zimmerman and he would be depicted as a no good gungrabber because they attack your strengths. The entire narrative would have been his being more pro-gun control than James Brady and a no good commie to boot

That might sway some right-wing hardliners who he never had a prayer with anyway, and people who only get their news from the NRA, but like I said, single-issue voters would eat it up regardless of no good commieness. It would play well with the middle and anybody who has Done The ResearchTM. Ever heard of the Green Mountain Boys? Vermont loves guns about as much as Texas. They're the only two states who were previously their own republic by right of violence, and they're both proud of it.

[Flagg]

Yeah, but the NRA wouldn't have endorsed him if he had triple the kills of George Zimmerman and he would be depicted as a no good gungrabber because they attack your strengths. The entire narrative would have been his being more pro-gun control than James Brady and a no good commie to boot

That might sway some right-wing hardliners who he never had a prayer with anyway, and people who only get their news from the NRA, but like I said, single-issue voters would eat it up regardless of no good commieness. It would play well with the middle and anybody who has Done The ResearchTM. Ever heard of the Green Mountain Boys? Vermont loves guns about as much as Texas. They're the only two states who were previously their own republic by right of violence, and they're both proud of it.

I'm aware, but iirc the democratic platform is pro gun control..)

[Raw Shark]

I'm aware, but iirc the democratic platform is pro gun control..)

Sanders is no typical Democrat, as you have asserted many times (sometimes rather caustically).

[Flagg]

I'm aware, but iirc the democratic platform is pro gun control..)

Sanders is no typical Democrat, as you have asserted many times (sometimes rather caustically).

Yeah, but he'd still be running on the Democratic platform, prostitute or no. And if he deviated from it on gun control then a whole heap of issues would happen and his campaign may well have imploded.

[jwl]

About the impeachment thing: that's something I heard from someone else, looking it up it doesn't seem to be true, so I'll retract that claim.

[Raw Shark]

Yeah, but he'd still be running on the Democratic platform, prostitute or no. And if he deviated from it on gun control then a whole heap of issues would happen and his campaign may well have imploded.

Eh. Maybe, maybe not. As a gun-owning progressive liberal, I may be biased on this one, but I personally think he could've made up for the loss of the anti-gun hardliners by taking a big chunk of the middle and a few middle-righters who didn't like Donny Jingles and liked his other policies. I meet very few people who want to abolish guns; most just want sane regulations.

[Gandalf]

Yeah, but he'd still be running on the Democratic platform, prostitute or no. And if he deviated from it on gun control then a whole heap of issues would happen and his campaign may well have imploded.

Eh. Maybe, maybe not. As a gun-owning progressive liberal, I may be biased on this one, but I personally think he could've made up for the loss of the anti-gun hardliners by taking a big chunk of the middle and a few middle-righters who didn't like Donny Jingles and liked his other policies. I meet very few people who want to abolish guns; most just want sane regulations.

But isn't he going to face the same problems from simply being to the left of the RNC on the issue?

[Soontir C'boath]

Given there are Democrats who feel in order to win, it is to move to the right as the party has been doing for some time now, they shouldn't have a problem with that either and it's not like Hillary would have been any better on gun control after all...

[Raw Shark]

But isn't he going to face the same problems from simply being to the left of the RNC on the issue?

I think both sides are generally on the same page: Registration and maybe a safety class is a good thing; taking yer gunz is bad. Sanders never said anything about firearms, and said a lot of shit that I agree with, so he was my candidate. It's only the extremists who oppose that. As far as I know, he doesn't give half a fuck about guns.

[Flagg]

But isn't he going to face the same problems from simply being to the left of the RNC on the issue?

I think both sides are generally on the same page: Registration and maybe a safety class is a good thing; taking yer gunz is bad. Sanders never said anything about firearms, and said a lot of shit that I agree with, so he was my candidate. It's only the extremists who oppose that. As far as I know, he doesn't give half a fuck about guns.

Republicans say they are for those things and then the NRA sends them a letter and suddenly any modification of current restrictions towards public safety is a casus beli for civil war.

[FireNexus]

About the impeachment thing: that's something I heard from someone else, looking it up it doesn't seem to be true, so I'll retract that claim.

Fair enough. We all make those mistakes from time to time. Good on you for addressing it and not letting it ride.

[Flagg]

About the impeachment thing: that's something I heard from someone else, looking it up it doesn't seem to be true, so I'll retract that claim.

It's an easy mistake to make considering how protected the POTUS is against civil suits.

[The Romulan Republic]

So the undemocratic farce that is the Electoral College votes tomorrow.

I'm not optimistic enough to think that it will actually reject Trump, but I expect some defections at this point. Probably some from Clinton's camp too- remember those Washington electors who said they wouldn't vote for Clinton no matter what?

[TimothyC]

So, fun fact. Clinton's entire margin in the popular vote can be attributed to California where she ran up her totals.

Cook Political Report spreadsheet

[Gandalf]

So, fun fact. Clinton's entire margin in the popular vote can be attributed to California where she ran up her totals.

Cook Political Report spreadsheet

I've found this story floating around various conservative communities. I find it hilarious in that it essentially boils down to outrage over "damn Kalifornian liberalbots" gaming the system in an already blue state.

[The Romulan Republic]

So, fun fact. Clinton's entire margin in the popular vote can be attributed to California where she ran up her totals.

Cook Political Report spreadsheet

So what? More votes is more votes.

Or do they not count if they're from one of those nasty blue states?

[Raw Shark]

Considering that California has a population and GDP rivaling a large number of countries, I'm inclined to say it matters. Also, its population is not entirely liberal. There's a lot of farmland there, and they dragged ass on legalizing recreational marijuana.

[The Romulan Republic]

Votes are votes are votes.

Its not like Clinton only got votes from CA. Who cares if it was CA that pushed her over the top, except whiney conservatives who seem to think voters in blue states somehow don't count for as much?

And yeah, people act like CA is all hippies, but its actually a very big and diverse state (as you say, it surpasses many countries in size).

[Q99]

So, fun fact. Clinton's entire margin in the popular vote can be attributed to California where she ran up her totals.

Cook Political Report spreadsheet

Wait a tic, that makes no sense. Or at the least, it's a deceptive way of framing it because one could equally say her popular vote win came from running up the vote elsewhere after Cali cancels out a lot of Trump's votes.

She's +944k in Illinois, +900 in Mass, +734k in Maryland, +1.7 mil in New York, etc.. These states add up to more than her total margin of popular victory.

California's margin is huge but it doesn't even make up the lion's share of Hillary's votes-above-breakeven.


Every state where one wins votes is part of the margin. The only way for it to be 'only Cali' is if Cali was the only Hillary state.

[Flagg]

So, fun fact. Clinton's entire margin in the popular vote can be attributed to California where she ran up her totals.

Cook Political Report spreadsheet

And? Does this matter other than being trivia or do you just find it funny that California's population was essentially disenfranchised?

[Tribble]

Where California and other large US states are really disenfranchised is the Senate. Like all states California gets just 2/100 senate seats, regardless of population... now how is that remotely fair and democratic?