Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yea, but didn't he get just under 50% of the vote ?

Mind you, the poll may well include folk who couldn't be arsed voting because both candidates were so poor.

46% at the current count.

Coincidentally I think only Obama has got more votes than Hilary in the History of the United States.
 
I've no problem with you criticising Trump or doing what you want but if you criticise him for being the worst at something (eg sexual transgressions or being warmongering) and I don't think he is the worst in those areas then I will say so

That's fair enough. However, I will kick dirt in your eye. (I joke)
 
Not entirely.

Yes entirely.

Trump is in 3rd place in the all-time rankings, more than Reagan, Bill Clinton, all yer Bushes etc.

Purely as a result of population growth, of course contemporary candidates will on average gain more votes, give or take the odd little spike (2008 was an exceptional turnout % for example).

Carter and Reagan elections had similar turnout % to Trump/Clinton but altogether totalled around 40 million less votes.

That's because every 4 years there's more people living in US than ever before...population growth.
 
Yes entirely.

Trump is in 3rd place in the all-time rankings, more than Reagan, Bill Clinton, all yer Bushes etc.

Purely as a result of population growth, of course contemporary candidates will on average gain more votes, give or take the odd little spike (2008 was an exceptional turnout % for example).

Carter and Reagan elections had similar turnout % to Trump/Clinton but altogether totalled around 40 million less votes.

That's because every 4 years there's more people living in US than ever before...population growth.

Just because there are more people doesn't mean more will vote. So that is not entirely true. There is more to it than just population growth. See 2012 election vs 2008.
 
Just because there are more people doesn't mean more will vote. So that is not entirely true. There is more to it than just population growth. See 2012 election vs 2008.


I don't think you read my reply to you, cheesy
give or take the odd little spike (2008 was an exceptional turnout % for example).



When's the next change.org coming out?

put Hilary in the White House as after Obama she's got more votes than anyone else in history!
 
Welcome Victor Davis Hanson, speaking on the Mythologies of the 2016 election.

I'm not sure why I'm posting this, but I sure enjoyed it. It's good to have an American chip in here from time to time I guess.

If you aren't finners, your head may explode at some point, though. Too much truth too fast in a post-truth era.

 
if nothing else, the CIA complaining about a foreign intelligence agency conspiring to install a right-wing strongman is amusing to no end...

The irony is something you can't lose sight of but can you imagine the reaction if say Corbyn won an election and it was revealed the Russians had actively supported his bid ? Heads would fall off everywhere but it's Trump so it's all good , amongst many things the lack of response astounds me but it's probably on me it's been a long day .
 
I don't think you read my reply to you, cheesy




When's the next change.org coming out?

put Hilary in the White House as after Obama she's got more votes than anyone else in history!

I did read your whole post, but the fact remains that your post was only partially true. It's not entirely about population. 1992 to 1996 saw a massive downturn in turnout...much like 2012 as compared to 2008 or even 2004.

As it stands now though this vote did not see the same turnout percentage that the vote in 2012 did which does support the population growth side of things, but it's only part of the story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top