"Posted by: Humberto
Date: February 18, 2017 05:36PM

"You called out nothing but your willingness to be purposefully obtuse.

"In your original response to TMSH I perceived you to act a bully, and I called you out for that.

"Anyway, I've learned from reading this board over time that your ego supply depends on you having the last word, so take it if you wish. I won't be insulted if you don't."

*****


You had the last word in the last thread. This, per board practice, is a new thread. I quoted, verbatim, Tall Tales, Short Fuse's ad homs, delivered at me in the name of jeeeeeesus. That is hardly "obtuse."

Your idea of a "bully," seems to be someone who won't roll over and take your bull. To that, I cheerfully plead guilty.

As far as TMSH is concerned, he strikes me as a religious bouncer type who won't let me into his bar to have a cold one with his make-believe Jesus, but who has reworked his delivery into that of a Xtian believer that tries to pile-drive atheists into submission (as you hold his coat) with his personal revival-tent testimony, calling non-believers "vipers" and screaming at them in all caps. Lordy, it's like roller derby for the righteous.

Flashback: It also reminds me of Jimmy Swaggart (who I once spotted in the Dallas-Ft. Worth airport waiting in the gate area dressed in all-black--kinda like the Mormon temple Satan. Now, that's scary).

Anyway, back to them there vicious vipers.

As if atheists attach human qualities to reptiles. It's the biblically-possessed who tend to do that (although I did once enjoy some fresh-kill rattlesnake meat on a LDS ward campout in Texas. Tasted like chicken. And it didn't even bite me because we cooked the devil right out of it).

And TMSH wonders why he gets 3 zzz's in my book. That's because he's below a Motel 6 when it comes to room and bored.

(Those quips, I tell ya. They're almost as funny as the Bible).


NOTE: For the context of this ongoing discussion, see the initial, now-closed thread, "ETB Was Never Removed from Office Due to Mental Illness. Should Trump?," at: http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1940344,1940344#msg-1940344



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 02/19/2017 06:57PM by steve benson.

...which has been closed, this article came across this morning:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/02/has-washington-gone-crazy.php

"The idea that Vice President Mike Pence and a majority of Trump’s cabinet will declare Donald Trump unable to perform the duties of the presidency is, of course, insane. It is rather ironic that the 25th Amendment schemers, not Donald Trump, are the ones who display signs of being disconnected from reality.

"Meanwhile, what is the evidence that Trump can’t discharge the duties of his office? There is none, obviously. If the Rasmussen survey is believed, 55% of likely voters think he is not only performing his duties, but performing them well–a much higher approval rating than Congressional Democrats’."

Steve, what this author is saying is that people like you live in the "liberal bubble." Meaning, ideas and theories are born and travel around in liberal circles, and other liberals pick up on them, believe in them, and repeat them, with the mistaken assumption being that the majority of the citizenry agrees with the premise.

Here's a satirization of the phenomenon of the "liberal bubble":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHG0ezLiVGc

While millions of liberals are going around believing that Trump is a nutjob and will surely be removed from office any day now, I guarantee you that few, if any people who voted for Trump, are not still supporting him, and if the election were held again today, he'd win again, and possibly win a couple more states that he won three months ago.

His latest bizarre outbursts, ramblings and multiple anger mismanagement moments were on full display during an hour-plus-long news conference he recently gave in the East Room of the White House.

If this is any indication of the state of Trump's mental capacities, it's all downhill from here. He won't need the East Room; he'll need a padded room.

(And may I just add that, in response to your no-brainer that Trump's mindless minions will stand by him no matter what, they happen to have lost the popular vote by between 3 to 5,000,000-- unless, of course, you buy his deluded, non-factual, disproven looney tune that he was the poor victim of massive voter fraud--a fraud in itself, for which he has offered absolutely no confirming evidence).



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 02/18/2017 10:10PM by steve benson.

Sorry, this could be a tangent.

I don't know about the mental capacity evaluation - not my strong point.

I balk at the following though:

1. Finger pointing: It was instilled in me as a young child that pointing a finger at someone was horribly impolite. I can't get used to DJT doing it repeatedly. Sometimes it means he's happy with a person, such as when he points at his wife, with a smile, indicating I take it that she has done something he likes (eg: her opening of today's rally). Often it indicates his displeasure, such as with the Jewish reporter at the news conference. A jabbing pointy index finger stabbing at folks. Not very courteous.

2. Things that come across as bullying (whether meant that way or not): Answering a question before it's completed and/or talking over the questioner. I know DJT is reputed to be "high energy" but surely he can hold his tongue until the end of someone else's sentence? Again with the Jewish reporter, demanding "sit down, sit down, SIT DOWN". Reporters have no choice but to obey and call him sir. Gives me the shudders. I don't like a person in a position of power exerting it in such unequal ways.

Having been both a JW and a Mormon (I know, what a dope) I am allergic to people not liking/allowing questions or especially presupposing what a question is going to be.

I was just talking about this today with my mom, describing how in both the WT organization (JWs) and LDS it's at best discouraged, or worse, considered a grave sin to ask a question, merely searching for information, with good will, and heaven help you (literally?) if you have a "doubt" ("doubt your doubts" as Mormon leaders teach/demand - what a mind-bender).

And I balk at someone browbeating a person who cannot fight back, for whatever reason. Maybe this is because I've been in that situation myself, in various circumstances, where you just have to put up with somebody's unfair exertion of illegitimate authority over you. When you can't query or respond back to an overbearing supervisor or boss. Or when a religious leader perceives your honest questioning as insurrection and takes it upon themselves to threaten your position in Paradise, so to speak.

So yeah, pointy fingers evoke a strong revulsion in me. To say nothing of someone ordering me to sit down when I prefer to stand. Grrrr



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/18/2017 10:18PM by Nightingale.

Trump--in the context of him making references to previous terror attacks in Germany, Belgium and France--falsely asserted in a made-up claim during a campaign-style rally in Florida that a terror attack occurred last Friday night in Sweden.

The Swedish government, through its U.S. embassy in Washington, denies it; rhe Swedish foreign minister denies it; a former Swedish prime minister denies it--and now the Trump White House is backtracking on it (via another madhatter Trump tweet in which he says he was talking about something he saw on FOX News).

Good lord.

Is this guy not attending his security briefings? He is a compulsive, fear-mongering liar who manifests a clear and growing detachment from reality, as his impulsive, flat-out fictions are churning up waves of anxiety around the world.

The Lone Deranger.

Is there a doctor in the house? (no particular party membership required)



Edited 20 time(s). Last edit at 02/20/2017 08:35AM by steve benson.

"His latest bizarre outbursts, ramblings and multiple anger mismanagement moments were on full display during an hour-plus-long news conference he recently gave in the East Room of the White House.

"If this is any indication of the state of Trump's mental capacities, it's all downhill from here. He won't need the East Room; he'll need a padded room."

Steve, everything you wrote here is merely opinion. Opinions are like assholes; everybody's got one. The fact that Trump doesn't talk or act like a typical politician doesn't mean that he has any mental issues. There simply is no truth or validity to your premise that Trump has mental issues, and that Mike Pence and/or the congress would seek to have him removed from office. Such ideas are merely the delusional rantings of irrational partisans. When you write such things, the only person's credibility you hurt is your own. Trump is fully supported by Pence, by the vast majority of Republican congressmen, and by the people who voted for him.

Perhaps you've missed the news of all of Trump's meetings over his first month in office with CEOs of major corporations and labor unions who are thrilled with his policies which will lead to job growth and national prosperity. Funny, I don't see any of those people coming out of those meetings opining that Trump is mentally ill and should be removed from office.

"(And may I just add that, in response to your no-brainer that Trump's mindless minions will stand by him no matter what, they happen to have lost the popular vote by between 3 to 5,000,000-- unless, of course, you buy his deluded, non-factual, disproven looney tune that he was the poor victim of massive voter fraud--a fraud in itself, for which he has offered absolutely no confirming evidence)."

Again we have the irrelevant "Trump lost the popular vote" nonsense. That does not refute my statement: "I guarantee you that few, if any people who voted for Trump, are not still supporting him, and if the election were held again today, he'd win again, and possibly win a couple more states that he won three months ago."

With every new announcement of American factory openings/expansions, stock market growth, and similar positive items, Trump's popularity will only increase.

It is the relevant popular vote count that indicates that those faithful Trump supporters are outnumbered by Trump opponents who will continue to stand against him. Furthermore, if, as you say, the popular vote Is "irrelevant," then tell that to Trump who still keeps falsely asserting that he won the popular vote.

Finally, if you don't want partisan voter bases to be discussed as far as Trump is concerned, then you shouldn't have brought up the subject in the first place. As you yourself admitted to having said earlier in this thread:

"I guarantee you that few, if any people who voted for Trump, are not still supporting him . . ."

Earth to Randy: Trump lost the popular vote. That's not an irrelevant point--at least not to Trump, who continues to lie about supposedly having won it.



Edited 10 time(s). Last edit at 02/19/2017 05:52PM by steve benson.

"It is the relevant popular vote count that indicates that those faithful Trump supporters are outnumbered by Trump opponents who will continue to stand against him."

The popular vote counts no more when you cited it in this post than it did when you cited it in your previous post. Hillary Clinton could have gotten 3 million or 6 million more popular votes than Trump, but that wouldn't have given her any more electoral college votes. Trump is the president, and Hillary will never be. You can continue to whine "But Hillary won the popular vote!" for the next four years, but it won't change a damn thing.

"Furthermore, if, as you say, the popular vote Is "irrelevant," then tell that to Trump who still keeps falsely asserting that he won the popular vote."

I don't know if Trump is correct about winning the popular vote until thorough investigations into illegal voting are completed.

"Finally, if you don't want partisan voter bases to be discussed as far as Trump is concerned, then you shouldn't have brought up the subject in the first place."

I didn't bring up any subject. I responded to your inane original post about Trump being mentally ill and that Pence and the congress could have him removed from office. I responded because there's no evidence that Pence or the congress have any plans, nor any call, to try to remove Trump from office. The idea is merely the irrational ravings of leftists who can't accept the fact that Trump won the election. They're like fans of a sports team which lost the championship game who complain that the refs screwed up, and who have the delusional idea that somehow, the trophy will be taken away from the victors and given to their team.

Trump won 31 states and 304 electoral college votes. That makes him president of 100% of the USA. Thus, "partisan voter bases" don't amount to jack-shit until the 2018 elections.

had not "millions" of illegal votes been cast against him.

Trump has yet to prove this assertion of his, despite his claim that he has the evidence that millions of illegal votes were cast against him, thus supposedly depriving him of the popular vote win. Republican and Democratic state party officials alike have subsequently responded that Trump's claim is not true.

Please provide evidence backing up Trump's assertion that millions of people voted illegally on November 8th, resulting in him losing the popular vote. If this matter is, as you say, "irrelevant," please tell that to Trump. He keeps on bringing it up. And he keeps on failing to produce the goods proving it. But, then again, perhaps you think Trump's compulsive pathological lying on the popular vote count is also irrelevant.

You are trying to have it both ways. On the one hand, you introduced into the argument the numerical headcount of voters. When, in response, I pointed out that, per the partisan voter base, Trump actually lost the numerical vote count in terms of the individual popular vote totals, you tried switching to the Electoral College argument. It is not disputed that Trump won the Electoral College count.

What is disputed (by Trump, Randy, by Trump) is the issue of who won the popular vote count. Trump continues to peddle the monumental myth that he won the overall popular vote count. When Trump decides to quit publicly pushing that demonstrable lie, then I'll quit pushing back against this fantasy that Trump is obsessed with spreading.
------



Now, how does this relate to Mormonism? Easy:

"Article of Faith 13

"We believe in being honest, true . . . "



Edited 17 time(s). Last edit at 02/20/2017 12:05PM by steve benson.

I read that the greens stopped pushing ahead with the recounts they demanded because they were beginning to uncover massive voter fraud with cases like some counties having thousands more votes cast than voters registered.

maybe 'fake news', maybe not.

Why did the vote recounts stop?

"liberal bubble", "conservative bubble", both are just echo-chambers for what you choose to hear.

deleted...(wrong thread)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/19/2017 05:51AM by eternal1.

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1941135,1941135#msg-1941135



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/20/2017 02:04AM by steve benson.

randyj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Steve, what this author is saying is that people
> like you live in the "liberal bubble." Meaning,
> ideas and theories are born and travel around in
> liberal circles, and other liberals pick up on
> them, believe in them, and repeat them, with the
> mistaken assumption being that the majority of the
> citizenry agrees with the premise.

Have you considered the possibility that the opinion piece you read is simply wrong?

> While millions of liberals are going around
> believing that Trump is a nutjob and will surely
> be removed from office any day now...

There's a difference between what you said, and observing that Trump has real mental stability issues and *should* be removed from office because of them.

> I guarantee
> you that few, if any people who voted for Trump,
> are not still supporting him, and if the election
> were held again today, he'd win again, and
> possibly win a couple more states that he won
> three months ago.

An empty "guarantee," since you can't "guarantee" any such thing. And many polls, which put his job approval rating well below 50%, appear to contradict your worthless "guarantee."

Woo-hoo! Steve vs. Randy smackdown!! Wait 'til I get some of my…

OH F***! I'M OUT OF POPCORN!!

Yea I saw that thread later on today and it looked like things kinda escalated quickly with no filler haha jk. Just back and forth action straight to the point stuff and I realized I may not have been the one that ruined the thread after all or maybe I still did. I don't even like trump though but I gotta defend mental illness and PTSD.

The republicommies are plotting to remove Drumpf so that they can install their Pence monkey who is even scarier than Drumpf.

compared to Donald "That's-All-I've-Got."

For the GOP establishment, Pence is a seasoned insider and a known quantity who understands the political system, who has been an integral part of it for decades and
who has a proven ability to cooperate, compromise and get things done within the present, generational and deeply-entrenched, established system without poisoning the water supply--a person who knows the script and who won't sink the ship. Pence understands that it is not a system that is drawn to Trump's anarchist vow to destroy the village in order to save it.

In other words, Pence is a team player who is predictable, knowledgeable, manageable, affable and dependable. None of which describes Trump.

To the contrary, Trump is a gas-bag disruptor who is petulant, impulsive, uneducated, undisciplined, unpredictable, unteachable, uncontrollable, uncurious, uncouth, profoundly narcissistic, deeply insecure, disgustingly sexist, Instinctively racist, freakishly foul, a pathological liar to such an extent that it startles even pathological liars, and a mental case who has a drug addiction-like craving for approval and adulation--and who gets that rush through his overblown, egocentric crowd-sizing, alternative-universe delusions.

Why do you think he's currently on the trail, stumping like he did during the presidential campaign, desperately seeking the roar of the worshipping crowds? Because, inside, he's nothing--and the party bosses want something.

Like it or not, Pence is that something, waiting in the wings for when Trump finally wigs out. For the Republican establishment, the sooner that happens, the better.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 02/19/2017 12:30AM by steve benson.

That's what makes Pence so frightening. He's an insane dominionist who will stop at nothing to create his theocracy.

and how to deal with it (as I have explicitly pointed out in previous posts and threads).

The Mormon Church violated its own procedures with regard to privately transferring power from an incompetent president to his assistance and then lying about it. In contrast, the U.S. Constitution (which Mormons claim is "God inspired") contains available mechanisms for openly dealing with presidents who are believed to be unsuited to continue in office. There are those who wish to channel the discussion into a purely political tributary (witness this thread).

Don't worry, folks. According to the Mormon Church, God is in charge and will call upon the Latter-day Saints to rescue the Constitution when it is hanging by its own thread. :-)



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/20/2017 02:23AM by steve benson.

"The republicommies are plotting to remove Drumpf so that they can install their Pence monkey who is even scarier than Drumpf."

Yes, Dave the Atheist, you're exactly right. And southern states prevent blacks from voting, and you can't get health care in Alabama. You are so right about so many things.

They've been plotting for a while it seems

Even I have to admit you are probably right on how things will unfold and they will probably happen soon, I do see pence taking his place.

I love this . . . Obama proposes a stimulus package and people start dressing up like the founding fathers and parading around (honey, how does my Thomas Jefferson wig look?). Trump proposes a billion dollar stimulus and the tea party goes ape.

Being an extreme liberal, I must say that I'm so happy the republicans elected Trump - someone who opposes many traditional republican values. I told my mormon friend shortly after Trump announced that I liked him. I still do.

I'm listening to all the people who think he's a nut, and I must admit, I'm seeing a bit of an over-reaction.

What the narrow minded, willfully ignorant, and lightly read can't comprehend are both sides are owned by the same corporate and financial masters. Here's the real rub, Trump is a douche, but a populist douche. Had a "loose cannon" populist douche emerged from the left the poltico-media establishment would be crapping themselves in the same manner. Ideological thinkers, "idiots" from the other side would be losing their minds like the other side is doing. Why? They profit from gaming the public. Wake up! It's like Mormonism vs JWs then finding out it all owned by the same bastards.

Religiously you've been mind effed since birth by an idiot Joe Smith. What are the odds you've been politically and economically screwed sense birth by people waaaaay smarter that ol Joe? Ask yourself why history until 100 years ago was all about gaining resources and riches, but now that aspect is met with radio silence and weak explanations? Ask yourself why you were taught what to think, and not how to think. Think about how much time was spent on teaching you formal logic? Not much right? Why does most news resemble op-ed rather than convenience of facts? Why is society gone mad?

Just like Mormonism, there are aspects of history, society, and reality people love to deny and never consider to exist in a state of self certain blissful ignorance. I never like to tell people what to think, but always willing to point people to extremely well researched history then draw your own conclusions. Before weighing substantial information it's like arguing with a 3 year old.

"We were not born critical of existing society. There was a moment in our lives (or a month, or a year) when certain facts appeared before us, startled us, and then caused us to question beliefs that were strongly fixed in our consciousness-embedded there by years of family prejudices, orthodox schooling, imbibing of newspapers, radio, and television. This would seem to lead to a simple conclusion: that we all have an enormous responsibility to bring to the attention of others information they do not have, which has the potential of causing them to rethink long-held ideas.” Howard Zinn


"The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies... is a foolish idea. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can throw the rascals out at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.”
― Carroll Quigley

I'm thinking you're making sense.

Maybe it is the same.

I recall 8 years ago, you were socialist if you wanted income tax rates at 39%, but a capitalist if you wanted 35%.

For someone who claims to hate the media so much, he can't seem to stop himself from throwing them so much red meat.

This board is rife with posts about the Q being their own worst enemy, authoitarian bumblers who drive away members, their twisty-tangly manipulations and ever-changing meanings of words. Still, they remain in power, raking in the dough. It can be discouraging, but there is very little law to prevent the harm they do.

Not so with a president - as Steve's thread pointed out- who swore an oath to defend the Constitution (a thing made of words), not destroy it. There have been great debates and court cases, even a war, over the meanings of those words, as is only right and proper in the evolution of our society.

Words are precious things; they are a unit of measure by which humans separate themselves from the wilds of nature, a basis of civilization, a way to communicate ideas. When a common understanding of words can be had, debates can proceed to compromise and agreement through logical arguments.

Not so, for one so uneducated as to ignore or discard these time-tested, hard-won conventions of communication. This autocrat has inflamed the passions of a nation with his passionate words, and we would do well to brush up on historical lessons concerning national responses to such leaders.

Political machines are slow, onerous and clunky. This leader seems to want to throw ours away. Germany did not appreciate her economic and educational prowress, prior to the maniac who inflamed her passions. That maniac also stated -all- members of a particular religious group, from a particular part of the world, to be "the enemy of the people." He stated his desire to "take the oil" (lands and resources) of others. Such leaders need their enemies; again, remember the Q.

We can go way back in time, and see common themes in subduing "the other" for nothing more than the personal aggrandizement of a given leader. Anyone who stands behind such a leader with an unquestioning, uncompromizing glare, will be judged by history to be guilty of his crimes.

If you can't see it, remove the rose-colored glasses and look again. If you choose to stand idly by as this leader inflames passions the world over, I have very few words to describe you, none of them positive.

Words, and a picture being worth a thousand of them, are our tools of battle against such tyrants. Watch not only your words, but be exceedingly leary of anyone who seems to seek sole control of what words mean.

Steve's thread pointed out not only the similarities to Mormonism, but the differences, too. We have a legal recourse available to us. We can choose to use it.


https://www.thenation.com/article/words-in-the-age-of-trump/

And quite the dramatic thread, this.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/20/2017 07:39AM by steve benson.

I'm glad the politics was relaxed or we wouldn't have this thread. I've enjoyed reading it. You and Randy always make good sparing partners. Now you and Cabby not so much.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/20/2017 09:03AM by Elder Berry.

1. The issue of truth telling

2. The issue of mental stability

I tied it into Mormonism in the broader context by referring to the 13th Article of Faith, as well as by referring back to my earlier post about the Mormon Church's approach to mental incapacitation of its president vs. the U.S. Constitution's approach to incapacitation of the nation's president.

I tried to stay out of overt partisan politicking by not endorsing any political figure and, in that effort, noted that both Republican and Democratic state officials have been openly critical of Trump's recent track record of lying.

I mentioned Pence as an example of better statescraft in that regard than Trump's (although I probably should not have referred to him as "Petrified Pence"; I tried to go back in and remove that ill-advised reference but the time clock had run out on that particular post. Like everyone else here, I'm trying to figure out and abide by the new, more open Admin approach to politics within its stated rules).



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/20/2017 10:09AM by steve benson.

Mr. Trump did NOT campaign to win the popular vote; he campaigned to win the Presidency. His margin of defeat in California alone was 4.26 million.....at state where he wisely stayed away from.

Many in our nation simply REJECTED Clinton corrupt politics.

The last 3 days of the campaign, Trump greatly outworked Hillary and held large rallies is key states.....very smart!

Well...most people in our nation (wisely IMO) rejected both of them. Hillary won millions more votes, but a lot of people voted third party and the overwhelming majority stayed away entirely.

Saying he's 'popular' is the definition of an exaggeration, even a falsehood--his approval ratings are lower than any president before him. 2016 voter turnout was at a 20-year low. The third-party percentage hit a many-year record. And that's excluding all the people who held their noses and voted for one or the other because they felt they 'had' to. So the fact is, the VAST majority of Americans didn't want him or his opponent.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/20/2017 02:45PM by Loyalexmo.

Loyalexmo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well...most people in our nation (wisely IMO)
> rejected both of them.

Um...no.

Popular vote:
Clinton: 65,844,610
Trump: 62,979,636
Others: 7,804,213

It's a little hard to call 7.8 out of 137 million (less than 6% of the voters) "most people in our nation." "Most people in our nation" chose one or the other.

Interestingly, 3 "battleground" states (Ohio, Iowa, and Wisconsin) had lower total votes cast in 2016 than in 2012. All three also had significant law changes since 2012 regarding ease of voting. Hmm...

Um, yes.

About half of the American public did not vote, meaning they chose neither candidate, and it was a 20-year low in voting turnout. That's what I was referring to. So to call Trump 'popular' when we had record low voter turnout (and when questioned, most folks said it was because they hated both candidates) is far-fetched.

I only mentioned third party candidates because indeed, more people voted for them than in most previous elections, so even the few who DID vote often did not choose one of the two who was certainly going to win--again, because they hated both of them so much. So less than half of the American public voted for EITHER Clinton or Trump, and of those, more voted for Clinton. Hardly a 'populist' hero.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/20/2017 05:03PM by Loyalexmo.

Loyalexmo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Um, yes.
>
> About half of the American public did not vote,
> meaning they chose neither candidate...

Sorry, you're still behind in the numbers.
About 60% of eligible voters cast votes, about 40% did not.
40% is still not "most of the American people."
It's a lot, to be sure -- but it's not "most."

> and it was a
> 20-year low in voting turnout.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_States_presidential_elections#/media/File:U.S._Vote_for_President_as_Population_Share.png

Percentages were considerably lower in both 2000 and 1996 than in 2016. Of both total population eligible to vote and of registered voters. So...no again.

> That's what I was
> referring to. So to call Trump 'popular' when we
> had record low voter turnout (and when questioned,
> most folks said it was because they hated both
> candidates) is far-fetched.

Oh, I don't call Trump "popular."
I just like actual numbers :)

> I only mentioned third party candidates because
> indeed, more people voted for them than in most
> previous elections...

Third-party vote in 2016 was about 5.7%.
Ross Perot got 8% in '96, and nearly 19% in '92.
Even Ralph Nader alone got over 3% in 2000.

> so even the few who DID vote
> often did not choose one of the two who was
> certainly going to win--again, because they hated
> both of them so much.

Once again, I have a hard time calling over 137 million people who voted for Trump or Clinton "the few who did vote," or the 5.7% third-party vote total "often did not choose one of the two." You can if you like, I guess.

> So less than half of the
> American public voted for EITHER Clinton or Trump,
> and of those, more voted for Clinton. Hardly a
> 'populist' hero.

Sorry, still not a fact. 40% of eligible voters didn't vote (whether they did so because they hated both candidates is speculation), and less than 6% voted for someone other than the two -- that's still only 46%, and 54% voted for either Clinton or Trump. That's not less than half.

I can't stand Trump. I'm not sticking up for him. I'm just like factual numbers.

Gary Johnson won a higher percentage of the vote than Nader, and yes, that's why I said 'most'--he won the highest percentage of any third party candidate since Ross Perot in '96, and the 7th highest of any third party candidate in a century. So yep, that confirms precisely what I said.

You are correct that the 20-year turnout statement was wrong; I was looking at an earlier report, before all ballots came in. Your number of 40% of eligible voters who didn't vote is also incorrect by every voter turnout report I've seen (which vary, but the highest I've seen was 58%, lowest 53%), would like to see the source on that.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/20/2017 05:50PM by Loyalexmo.

Loyalexmo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You are correct that the 20-year turnout statement
> was wrong; I was looking at an earlier report,
> before all ballots came in. Your number of 40% of
> eligible voters who didn't vote is also incorrect
> by every voter turnout report I've seen (which
> vary, but the highest I've seen was 58%, lowest
> 53%), would like to see the source on that.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-voter-turnout-wasnt-way-down-from-2012/

That first one is from Nov. 15, and contains *estimates.* It's off by about 2%.

This one has final numbers:

http://www.electproject.org/home/voter-turnout/voter-turnout-data

Their numbers (60.2% of eligible voters voted, so 39.8% of eligible voters didn't vote) match all of the final results reported after Dec. 20.
Be careful that you're not reading articles that came out before the final results were announced (Dec. 20). CNN, for example, has one that shows up from Nov. 15 that isn't final results, yet it shows up prominently in search engines -- despite it being wrong. CNN did update from their estimates after the Dec. 20 final results, though.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/20/2017 08:17PM by ificouldhietokolob.

how many people support Trump.

He will be impeached. The only question is whether the mental competence issue will be used or the many demonstrations of Trump's disregard for the law.

As an aside, Trump was foolish enough to disrespect America's intelligence community. This is where the transcripts are coming from. They are bringing him down as quickly as possible. These are the people protecting America- even from an inside threat.

If, for some reason, the DOJ lags or chooses not to pursue Trump's culpability, he will suffer a heart attack at a time of the CIA's choosing.



Kathleen

I would say I hope you're right, but...I'd rather have almost anyone than Pence.

I guess I'm a rare breed.

Normally an extreme liberal, I found myself liking Hillary and Trump. I was looking forward to either serving as President. But, I also thought they were both full of it - at times. Maybe even most of the time.

RandyJ who swallows the whole republican Trump burrito - licks his plate clean - and defends every aspect of his party as though his essence depends on it. I mean, RandyJ hasn't decided who won the popular vote - and probably isn't sure whose inaugural address drew the biggest crowd. To paraphrase Zappa - get off the crusty religious nozzle. :)

I can laugh at Trump. I could shake my head at Hillary.

Didn't leaving mormonism teach you to avoid hero worship? To question and doubt - everything?

Isn't it a red flag when you're defending every aspect, every position, every statement?

I think you're definitely a rare breed, haha! Most people I spoke to hated both. I disliked Hillary and hated/hate Trump. Wanted Bernie very badly. Ah, well.

I'm being punished for not voting that's what all the never ending drama is about haha jk. Bernie is actually a cool cat I might have gotten off my ass and voted if he was in the final two.

I see the whole "ETB Was Never Removed from Office Due to Mental Illness. Should Trump?" title as a contrived adhearance to board policy and merely used to segway into partisan political opinion.

I don't mind this type of back and forth and would love to enter the fray myself if board is ok with this type of exchange. I feel there is much info lacking from the discussion.

OP is not demonstating spirit of board policy i.e. respect for an oposing view as I can point out various 'put down' type remarks which is what board administrators don't want here.

It was a segway for sure

Pence is simply a more sanitized version of Drumpf! When called upon, he does have the capacity to put on a more/less normal show! Let's elaborate for a brief moment - a sweetheart version of full blown Narcissist Donny Drumpf sounds about right! Don't be fooled by the Pense diversionary tactic/his seemingly endless attempts at damage control! Like his erratic, unstable oversee-er, Pense does not represent mainstream American values! It's abundantly clear that Pense/Drumpf are alt-right, fringe believers/advocates who invited the likes of Brietbart's Steve Bannon/juvenile delinquent Steven Miller into the White House to advise the President/Vice-President on Policy Matters! Both of these fringe, alt-right anarchists/their in-house, complicit friends need the boot - now!

When all the dirt finally sees the light of day, we will likely face a Constitutional Crisis! The Russian, Ukraine/Crimea debacle compounded by Russian hacking - a premeditated, conspiratorial tactic to influence our election process/put Drumpf in the White House has been wildly successful! This declaration of War by a foreign enemy/complicit, political, American operative enhanced by significant campaign contributions from Putin/Associates has endangered our Democratic Republic! Yes indeed, in time, Donald J. Drumpf's fascist, criminal empire will come crashing down! As Always, tnurg (GRUNT)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/21/2017 01:19PM by tnurg.

CIA interfered with and tried to influence the last French parliamentary election and have been 'monitoring' (aka spying on) the french and german governments' communications. This is only what we know, they probably 'monitor' far more governments.

Governments all over the world have been doing this - interfering with elections in 'free' countries for centuries, even interfering in their own country's elections.

Do you remember learning about the agent provocateurs of old whipping up the first unions so the union members could be arrested for illegal assembly? Or those provocateurs who convinced protestors to commit criminal damage and therefore warrant arrest? Enemies to the status quo were quickly identified, arrested and thrown into prison or sent off to the penal colony down under on the say so of the provocateur/government agent/spy.

It is nothing new - the sad thing is that people think it doesn't happen 'here' or happen 'any more'. Provocateurs do not have to show their faces anymore - a lot of influence can be wielded with anonimity over the internet, less anonymous is opinion pieces in the media or the release of the results of 'studies' by an NGO, trying to influence public opinion or change the narrative of - and thereby control - public discussion.

I think it would be naive to believe that no-one is trying to influence the public at any given time. Just as it is certainly naive to think the US government is not covertly interfering with other countries, as other countries in turn attempt to do the same with the US.

Well hopefully the government is reading all this stuff so they can read all the crazy mormonism stuff as well, I know they can shut that religion down, come on government do one good thing.