>drumpanzees will defend this

When will you mouthbreathers admit that she. fucking. won?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=sChapaeZO5Y
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Yeah... how old are you?

What did she win?

Electoral college exists so California and New York don't choose the president each time. Come on now!

We have this thread every hour.

In all fields

They both fucking suck. But he did win, fair and square.

Actually, no, I've explained it enough times, as have hundreds of other posters here.

I could explain it to you, again, but I can;t understand it for you.

You're counting nacho niggers who voted illegally.
Only white men who own property should be allowed to vote.

Fuck yourself dick nose!

She didn't win the LEGAL popular vote.

...

>huurrrrr durrr muh uhlectruhl collige

You do realize that was conceived in the days of slavery by slave owning rural white folks who wanted to suppress the votes of city people?

It's not about suppressing the vote of city people
It's about not suppressing the vote of non-city people

>UNDOCUMENTED WINNER!
Serious though, alt-left election deniers are cringe af.

She did win... the popular vote.
Which is like winning the "didn't try to eat his/her own poop for the entire day" award at the special olympics, it has no meaning other than making you feel a little bit better.

that horn of blue in the deep south

What about that time when Bernie Sanders was winning all the primaries by popular vote but the old cunt was still winning the delegates anyways? Karma's a motherfucker

She didn't win. I'm not a conservative and I realize she lost. She made a ton of mistakes and didn't care because she thought it was her god-given destiny to be president, and she paid the price.

Being this fucking stupid. There are so many disenfranchised voters in this country because of our ridiculous electoral system. At the very minimum we need to start splitting electoral votes by percentage, i.e. you win 60% of the vote, you get 60% of the points, not this winner-take-all bullshit.

As much as I fucking hate brown people sometimes, this has still zero sources backing it up and they are people too.

underrated post

Cityfags already cuck most of their states legislation and get most the funding what more do you fags need

is this a rekt thread hillbot got rekt calling all Sup Forumsros

>At the very minimum we need to start splitting electoral votes by percentage
There are already two states that do this
You're welcome to lobby to do it in your as well but if you think you're going to federally enforce that kind of shit you can gtfo my country

White men have been in control the past 500 years and all theyve done is oppress women, poc, lgbtq2 community, start world wars and engage in genocide, colonialism, slavery and imperialism. You had your chance and you blew it. It's time for women and poc to start running the show.

I look forward to the ext holocaust, kike. This time it'll actually be real.
>every one of you plebbit fuckers from le_dolan that still haven't figured out how to sage this shit get the gas as well.

if it wasn't obvious by the meme flag, it should be now
this is a troll thread boys

...

>implying this is a bad thing

an estimated 5 million illegals and dead people voted
She still lost

>suck off federal supremacy
>do so under the assumption that you'll maintain control of the fed
Nobody is stupid enough to do this, right?

Hillary Clinton is a shape shifting lizard that was sent by the Devil

>source: my ass

Why is it that a) you don't like that system and b) you think I'm not entitled to my own country because you disagree with me?

This isnt American Idol, its American democracy. We live in a representive democracy which is precisely why the electoral college exsists. If it weren't for the college, only the coastal cities would be making decisions for the rest of the nation.

I dont why I'm replying to you cause this is either 1. Bait or 2. You're too much of a sycophant and refuse to accept any opinions or facts that may refute your argument for the sake of you always being right. This is why we say liberalism is a mental disorder, cause you lack crtical thinking and basic common sense

Those numbers are expressed in gallons of blood spilled on their behalf?

Sage

I'm fine with the split vote, zero problems with it and I think it's pretty fair
I don't however think that revoking the rights of states to determine how to conduct their elections is acceptable just because people are mad that somebody won fair and square

mmm no, sweetie
she lost
BIGLY

>implying that a lying evil bitch trying to ruin our lives wouldn't be assassinated in less than 6 months

honestly I'm surprised somebody hasn't tried to assassinate Donald yet

Obama was your first president, wasn't he?
Or you just pretend to conveniently forget that O didn't win the popular vote in 2008

Bait, but I bit, so 8/10

the same thread every fucking day and the mods are still unable to do their "job"

All we have to do is look at Detroit run by blacks, and look to Europe as women are mainly running the show there and already know that women and POC in power, is a recipe for disaster!

Mods need to start deleting the "Killary won the popular vote" threads instead of deleting the tranny dilating threads.

She lost...DEAL WITH IT!

Sage

team with the most yards at the end of a football game doesn't win.

I know this is bait but it still gets me every fucking time

Are you some sort of democrat who believes that winning the popular vote makes fairy dust sprinkle down and turn you into the President?

I don't really care how states conduct their own elections. In my opinion, federal elections should, however, have a standard. Look at the nightmare we deal with in Florida every time.

I don't care that Clinton lost. She deserved to lose. I hope her loss brings about a change in the Dem party. I know it won't, but I can hope. What I do care about is the minority voters in Tennessee, in New York, in Alaska etc that have rarely if ever had their voice heard because of the winner take all system. That's why people don't vote in this country.

>client state wants a safe space

I think that what you would support, rather than a split vote electoral college, is a direct-democracy popular vote decision on the president.
I understand the sentiment about the votes not having much impact in states dominated by a particular party, but I think a better solution to that than unilaterally deciding how states will spend their electoral votes on a federal level is to allow the states to decide whether they want winner take all or split vote.

>not 100% on the historical accuracy of this but
I believe states already DID make a decision on whether they want winner-take-all or split voting and this is what they decided.

This falls into the same trap that was the reason for the creation of the electoral college. Huge population growth centers would determine everything instead of rural areas. Your solution doesn't solve that problem, our current system does.

>I hope her loss brings about a change in the Dem party.
They're trying to force the race baiter black supremacist Kamala Harris to run in 2020, even putting the California primaries earlier than usual, to benefit her.

Trump will win in a huge landslide if they go for another corporate woman pandering to identity politics and out of touch with the public, not to mention that she's been trying to get Hillary's donors to prop her up.

>my solution
I think you're a bit confused here bud. I'm defending the current system (where we have the electoral college, but some states have winner take all while others have split vote) and the user I'm speaking with wants to federally enforce split voting.

>perhaps what you're implying is that "my solution" is to let states decide whether to have split vote or winner take all
This is already the case

>Trump will win in a huge landslide if they go for another corporate woman pandering to identity politics and out of touch with the public
Hard to say. In my opinion, a large part of Donald's victory can be attributed to the exposed evils of Hillary. Unless either
>Donald's approval ratings skyrocket near the end of the presidency due to bigly amounts of winning
or
>There is also some dirt to dig up on Kamala
then I think it will be close

You are correct, they did, and most states went with the (arguably bad) status quo.

I understand that states, because of their relationship with the federal government, should have a say in their votes. One could argue that the states get that say when their residents do the voting regardless of how the electoral process actually works.

I would also support a 1 person, 1 vote direct system as well, but as many kind anons will quickly point out that apparently means New York and California decide the election (even though it doesn't.)

Split electoral votes would satiate the status quo whores while at the same time standardizing the federal electoral system for all the states and enfranchising millions of voters who up to now don't even bother leaving home.

They can go after her record of Attorney General in CA, not to mention those awful Senate hearings she's involved with.

If anything, cities with large populations should be separate from the states they reside in when concerning electoral votes. That way states like New York and Illinois outside of those cities can actually vote

I really hope they don't shoot themselves in the foot like that again. Trump is easy to beat.

They will. 2024 is a better bet for a Democrat president again.

Two scoops, two genders, two terms for Trump.

This fucking morron. Do you know why we have the electoral process.
50% of people live in city states and they vote democrat. That means the other states like countryside, farm land, industry, and homestead.

Plus everyone knows your meme fagging.

>S-s-so what if you scored more goals, we had more yardage!

>that apparently means New York and California decide the election (even though it doesn't.
I would definitely argue that it does. People living in big cities tend to have similar political views since they are affected similarly by policy. Since the population of the cities is much greater than that of rural areas, a direct democracy vote would render whatever political opinion differing from that of the city-dwellers irrelevant.
The nice thing about the electoral college is that the states have votes both statically and according to population. I do think that a split vote would be a nice solution but as you pointed out
>States should have a say in their votes
And, as I said earlier, if this is something that is important to you, you can lobby your state government to make this change. I will stand by the fact that the Federal government doesn't have the authority to tell states how to appropriate their electoral college votes or how to interpret the results of their general election.

When you factor out the rampant illegal voting that took place, you're left with a clear Trump popular vote victory. Even with the obvious vote cheating that occurred, at 2:45am est November 9th, 2016, Trump still had over a 1 million vote lead in the popular vote. Then, magically, they started finding all the Pedro and Sanchez votes in CA, NY, etc., over the following days. Total and complete sham.

Here's the problem with that. I vote for the best candidate. That means generally throwing away my vote on third party.

However, unpopular opinion incoming.

Trump has proven himself ineffectual at best, simply coasting along with the RNC establishment agenda. At worst he's proven himself malignant to the office, the executive branch, the judiciary, and the level of public discourse in our country. There is some argument to be made that he has de-legitimized himself as president with his actions in the public eye.

Because of this, I'd be liable to vote Democrat simply to get him the fuck out. I REALLY don't want it to come to that, as it would hurt me greatly to do so, but the man shouldn't be President. I can give a hundred fully objective reasons why he shouldn't be.

Eh, sage

When she actually does

>ineffectual at best
>malignant to the office
>I can give a hundred fully objective reasons why he shouldn't be
Hit me with 3

if she won why is she not POTUS?
Tictactoe motherfuckers

The 3 million non-citizen votes was first said by Alex Jones (hardly reliable) and I've yet to see an actual source for that information, just memes and people spouting it off.

Not a liberal, but you need a source to make a claim like that.

please name 10

Kek

dude get over yourself..its been almost a year...

Well we actually dont give a fuck what you think.
Trumps President, cry some more... booohooos

>If the worth of a vote of a city person is NOT artificially made less than that of a country person, then the country person is being oppressed REEEEEEE

Meritard logic.

read
>People living in big cities tend to have similar political views since they are affected similarly by policy. Since the population of the cities is much greater than that of rural areas, a direct democracy vote would render whatever political opinion differing from that of the city-dwellers irrelevant.

>supports the current tax bill
>promoting specific news platforms and calling everything else fake
>selling off national parks

First three that came to mind. I'll elaborate on why they are (in my analysis) bad if you like.

>What did she win?

Why are you assuming Jill Stein voters would have turned out for Hillary with your EPIC meme?

I'm not, ever hear of the recount that ended miserably? Guess not

>supports the current tax bill
This is a pretty new issue, but I'm confident that it's nowhere near as bad as the (fake news) corporate media is playing it up to be. If it was only good for big corporations would these large news corporations be condemning it?
>promoting specific news platforms and calling everything else fake
I'll agree that this is kind of toxic for the president to be supporting a news platform when news is supposed to be the bulldog of politics. Unfortunately, the news media hasn't been the bulldog for politics in a very long time. There are also several examples of CNN and the like fabricating stories to support their narrative only to retract if they've been caught out. (pic semi related, I don't have one that's particularly pertinent handy)
>selling off national parks
I haven't actually heard anything about this. Depending on the motivations and quantity/locations it could be a bad thing, but reason that he "shouldn't be president"?

stay mad your plan to import millions of beaners to vote for you was already foiled by straight white men 200 years before you even came up with it

When you guys admit that this is the ONLY metric that she "won" by. Trump won the mist states, counties, electoral votes, flipped more counties and states from blue to red than vice versa, and won on top of a wave of Republican wins in Congress and state elections. She won the popular vote because of California, the difference between them there makes up the entirety of the difference in total popular vote.

Say it with me...Electoral College.

SAGE

>voters would have turned out for Hillary
The dead ones did.

>2017
>Thinking the populous own any kind of power anymore.

>10 million illegals
>mostly concentrated in lawless "sanctuary" cities.
>But none of them voted
cause reasons

I'm so grateful the liberals and Dems are still crying almost two years later. Keep it coming! You're the reason Trump won!

...

>You do realize that was conceived in the days of slavery
So were all your human rights.

We were saved from this Sulphur lizard hag

/thread
donkey cannot recover from this

Looks like the cunt wants a trophy.

SAGE
SAGE

donkey has been gone for a while. obvious bait thread is obvious

Well man it's been nice talking with you, I've gotta head to class now.

>r*ddit spacing

>supports the current tax bill

Have you seen some of the stuff in there? Tax exempt status for a DeVos family christian uni (this got shot down because it was so ridiculously extreme, but it was in there). Removal of virtually every good middle class deduction. Increase in the standard deduction, but set to fall off over the next few years such that you'd be starting to lose money right around the time a Democrat might be taking office. Sunset provisions for all the personal tax breaks, but permanence for corporate tax cuts and tax cuts affecting the wealthy. Special interest giveaways out the ass. It's a disgusting bill regardless of which 'side' you're on.

Still question the motivations? There was a movement made that would have required corporations to use their savings from this bill to give back to their employees at the same rate they increased dividends and executive salaries (only pertaining to money saved from this bill) and it was voted right out.

Yes, CNN in the US has a clear DNC bias. But it is extremely toxic for the president of our country to be advocating that everything that isn't far-right leaning is fake. You can't tout Fox News and then put down CNN for partisan bias. Not as president.

Read up on Trump's Utah visit yesterday. He's giving away federal protected lands to companies for exploitation. Guess he wasn't kidding when he said of the environment 'we'll leave a little bit."

youtube.com/watch?v=sChapaeZO5Y

>This image still triggers Sup Forums

Why does the idea that most of the country prefers Hillary make you so mad?

>still crying about losing
Litterally KYS fagget. If you don't like the way America works, then GTFO. Rather then complaining for litterally years, get involved with local politics. Change starts at the bottom fuck face.

>voting system designed around electoral college
>b-but m-muh popular vote

kys, shillary didn't win shit according to your own LEGAL voting system

True illegals will obviously vote blue for dem programs and when shtf liberals will regret what they signed up for.

What is Ann afraid of? If anything that damn dirty commie will just end up necking himself!

Trump won the popular vote actually. Hillary had 6 million + false votes.


Nice try who shillcuck