We really should pay attention to the stay-aways who might have given the election away. Were there more “Democrats” who stayed away because Hilary Clinton was not the best possible candidate, or were there more “Republicans” who stayed because Donald Trump was the worst possible candidate?
My comment to “Trump King of Chaos” at http://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/04/opinion/trump-king-of-chaos.html?comments#permid=26207463:26212200.
Also scroll down for “Quote of the day” to
“Remember no drama Obama---how I long for those days.”
ACJ, Chicago
2018-03-05
Showing posts with label 2016 election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2016 election. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 06, 2018
Thursday, December 14, 2017
Russian collusion and Donald Trump
If you have a few hours free, read the Washington Post’s long article on Donald Trump and the Russians.
If you still have time read all the comments. This is a bit more time consuming because the Washington Post allows instant commenting. It’s great to have instant posting rather than waiting hours for arbiters to approve comments, but some people criticize others over and over again, often with insult rather than insight.
If you still have time read all the comments. This is a bit more time consuming because the Washington Post allows instant commenting. It’s great to have instant posting rather than waiting hours for arbiters to approve comments, but some people criticize others over and over again, often with insult rather than insight.
Monday, January 30, 2017
Thousands of phone calls are better than thousands of protestors
I posted the following to the comments section of “The Alt-Majority: How Social Networks Empowered Mass Protests Against Trump”, Farhad Manjoo, New York Times, 2017-01-30
Anti-Trump demonstrations are shedding harsh light on much of Trump’s arrogance, but my big question is what percentage of the protestors voted.
As stated in the article, the protests are getting attention and making Trump nervous. But are the protests going to change the minds of those in Congress who enable Trump?
A better way to make a protest is to call your U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives, even if they are Democrats. Calling Democrats will help give them more backbone.
The best way is to call, not send email or a letter. You can find your Senators phone numbers at https://www.senate.gov/ and your Representative’s number at http://www.house.gov/.
Keep your message brief: 200 words or less. Be polite. If you have a another message, don’t hesitate to call at another time.
Also call your state senators and representatives, especially if you live in a gerry-mandered state.
If you voted in the last election, the American people thank you. If you did not make sure to vote in each and every election from now on. And in your phone call, remind the office holder that you intend to vote.
The Trump White House doesn’t list a phone number, but it does have an email form at https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact. Gosh, what would happen if every protester filled out this form. Would it bring down one of the White House servers?
Anti-Trump demonstrations are shedding harsh light on much of Trump’s arrogance, but my big question is what percentage of the protestors voted.
As stated in the article, the protests are getting attention and making Trump nervous. But are the protests going to change the minds of those in Congress who enable Trump?
A better way to make a protest is to call your U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives, even if they are Democrats. Calling Democrats will help give them more backbone.
The best way is to call, not send email or a letter. You can find your Senators phone numbers at https://www.senate.gov/ and your Representative’s number at http://www.house.gov/.
Keep your message brief: 200 words or less. Be polite. If you have a another message, don’t hesitate to call at another time.
Also call your state senators and representatives, especially if you live in a gerry-mandered state.
If you voted in the last election, the American people thank you. If you did not make sure to vote in each and every election from now on. And in your phone call, remind the office holder that you intend to vote.
The Trump White House doesn’t list a phone number, but it does have an email form at https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact. Gosh, what would happen if every protester filled out this form. Would it bring down one of the White House servers?
Monday, January 23, 2017
Denying Donald
Yes, the title has three meanings.
The first was inspired by all the denials of the Trumpistas of facts, like the size of the Women's March vs. the size of the Inaugural crowd.
The second is a play on Trump's still ranting about "Lying Hilary”.
The third is that we should do all we can to deny the legitimacy of Trump's election.
For more on comparison of the crowds at Trumps inauguration and the Women’s March, see https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/22/us/politics/president-trump-inauguration-crowd-white-house.html
Denying Donald said that the rain stopped as soon as he started speaking. According to the NYT the rain continued throughout Trump's speech. Could this be a message from God expressing disapproval of Trump as President?
Not really, if Clinton had won, she would have had the same weather. “Conservative” “Christians” would have been certain the rain meant God’s disapproval of her. Liberal Christians would say “The rain falls on the just and unjust alike."
Remember the perspective, Trump came in third to a de facto "None of the Above”. One would think he would have a bit of humility. Too many people liked Trump even less than Clinton and stayed away, thus giving the election to Trump.
The first was inspired by all the denials of the Trumpistas of facts, like the size of the Women's March vs. the size of the Inaugural crowd.
The second is a play on Trump's still ranting about "Lying Hilary”.
The third is that we should do all we can to deny the legitimacy of Trump's election.
For more on comparison of the crowds at Trumps inauguration and the Women’s March, see https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/22/us/politics/president-trump-inauguration-crowd-white-house.html
Denying Donald said that the rain stopped as soon as he started speaking. According to the NYT the rain continued throughout Trump's speech. Could this be a message from God expressing disapproval of Trump as President?
Not really, if Clinton had won, she would have had the same weather. “Conservative” “Christians” would have been certain the rain meant God’s disapproval of her. Liberal Christians would say “The rain falls on the just and unjust alike."
Remember the perspective, Trump came in third to a de facto "None of the Above”. One would think he would have a bit of humility. Too many people liked Trump even less than Clinton and stayed away, thus giving the election to Trump.
Saturday, January 21, 2017
Thanks to the Marchers Who Voted
I posted the following comment to “‘We’re Not Going Away’: Huge Crowds for Women’s March”, Anemona Harocollis, Yamiche Alcindor, and Niraj Chokshi, New York Times, 2017-01-21.
If you were a marcher and a voter, your country thanks you.
If you were a marcher and not a voter, your country hopes you make sure to vote next time.
Remember, Trump came in third to a de facto "none of the above".
If you were a marcher and a voter, your country thanks you.
If you were a marcher and not a voter, your country hopes you make sure to vote next time.
Remember, Trump came in third to a de facto "none of the above".
The only way
You throw your vote away
Is to stay away!
Monday, December 12, 2016
Movement afoot to “unelect” Trump
See https://www.change.org/p/electoral-college-make-hillary-clinton-president-on-december-19-4a78160a-023c-4ff0-9069-53cee2a095a8
According to this article, in 14 of states where the voters that showed up favored Trump, the electors can vote for someone else without penalty.
I wonder if any of these petitions are limited to the people who actually showed up, or can those who didn’t bother to vote also sign the petitions?
Do I jest? Not quite, the de facto winner of the 2016 election was “none of the above”. Over 40% of eligible voters stayed home. See Voter Turnout Data - United States Elections Project.
231,556,622 voting eligible population (VEP)
137,297,086 ballots counted
59.3% turnout
94,259,536 didn’t cast a counted ballot
40.7% of VEP
65,476,535 votes (48.1%) Clinton
28.3% of VEP
62,821,935 votes (46.1%) Trump
27.1% of VEP
8,998,616 votes (6.6%) Others
3.9% of VEP
Over half of those who showed up voted for someone else than Donald Trump. That certainly is not “the people” deciding for Trump.
But when you consider that over two-thirds of the eligible voters did not cast a vote for Trump, you would think Trump would have a bit more humility. Don’t hold your breath.
If you were one of the no-shows, remember,
The only way
To throw your vote away
Is to stay away!
According to this article, in 14 of states where the voters that showed up favored Trump, the electors can vote for someone else without penalty.
I wonder if any of these petitions are limited to the people who actually showed up, or can those who didn’t bother to vote also sign the petitions?
Do I jest? Not quite, the de facto winner of the 2016 election was “none of the above”. Over 40% of eligible voters stayed home. See Voter Turnout Data - United States Elections Project.
231,556,622 voting eligible population (VEP)
137,297,086 ballots counted
59.3% turnout
94,259,536 didn’t cast a counted ballot
40.7% of VEP
65,476,535 votes (48.1%) Clinton
28.3% of VEP
62,821,935 votes (46.1%) Trump
27.1% of VEP
8,998,616 votes (6.6%) Others
3.9% of VEP
Over half of those who showed up voted for someone else than Donald Trump. That certainly is not “the people” deciding for Trump.
But when you consider that over two-thirds of the eligible voters did not cast a vote for Trump, you would think Trump would have a bit more humility. Don’t hold your breath.
If you were one of the no-shows, remember,
The only way
To throw your vote away
Is to stay away!
Thursday, November 17, 2016
More on the Electoral College
For a different view than I gave in “Why we have our electoral mess”, see J. Craig Scherf, "Electoral College maintains one of Constitution’s checks and balances" Duluth News Tribune, 2106-11-15.
Times have changed since the Constitution was written. Then the voters were male property owners. Their interests were in protecting their property, whether it was real estate or slaves. They felt that they could best protect their property by state laws, not federal laws.
But the interests of the states as property protectors has diminished in several ways.
Many of us are not fixed or even interested in our states as defenders of all of our interests.
Those of us who are property owners might change property for a variety of reasons. We might want a bigger or smaller residence. We might want to move from a rural area to a city or vice versa. Or we might move out of state, something that seems to happening more frequently as people change jobs within a company or get a job in a different company.
I have lived in three states and three foreign countries.
I grew up in Cleveland OH and in surrounding areas. I have not lived in Ohio for 53 years. When the Cleveland Indians were in the World Series, I could care less!
I have lived in Minnesota for 42 years. Do I know what the state song is? What the state flag looks like? I probably know more U.S. and world history than I do Minnesota history.
Our state lives get even more complicated. How many people live in one state but work in another? Duluth-Superior? New York City with commuters from three states: New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut? Philadelphia with Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware. I myself commuted from an exurb west of Philadelphia, through Philadelphia, and on to Cherry Hill NJ. Chicago also has commuters from three states: Illinois, Wisconsin, and Indiana.
And don’t forget that there are many reverse commuters who go from the central city to jobs outside the city, especially as more and more companies build facilities outside the central city.
Many of these commuters have no real property, they rent their living spaces. So, where do their local loyalties lie: where they live or where they work. They only get input into the laws that affect where they work is through federal law, not state laws. The only way they have input into the affairs of the state in which they work is through personal contact with acquaintances who are residents of their work state or letters to the editor of the regional newspaper.
The electoral college could give our co-workers more or less clout in an election than we have. The Delaware resident who works in Philadelphia had a greater weighted Electoral College vote than his or her colleagues who live in Pennsylvania! It’s almost like saying that short people have more votes than tall people!
"Would we truly want large regional majorities from the two coasts to alone choose our president? The system of checks and balances left to us by the Founders is the surest guarantee of protecting minority rights that we have.” - J. Craig Scherf
But do we want small regional electoral majorities to take away the rights of the majority of the whole nation?
Times have changed since the Constitution was written. Then the voters were male property owners. Their interests were in protecting their property, whether it was real estate or slaves. They felt that they could best protect their property by state laws, not federal laws.
But the interests of the states as property protectors has diminished in several ways.
Many of us are not fixed or even interested in our states as defenders of all of our interests.
Those of us who are property owners might change property for a variety of reasons. We might want a bigger or smaller residence. We might want to move from a rural area to a city or vice versa. Or we might move out of state, something that seems to happening more frequently as people change jobs within a company or get a job in a different company.
I have lived in three states and three foreign countries.
I grew up in Cleveland OH and in surrounding areas. I have not lived in Ohio for 53 years. When the Cleveland Indians were in the World Series, I could care less!
I have lived in Minnesota for 42 years. Do I know what the state song is? What the state flag looks like? I probably know more U.S. and world history than I do Minnesota history.
Our state lives get even more complicated. How many people live in one state but work in another? Duluth-Superior? New York City with commuters from three states: New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut? Philadelphia with Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware. I myself commuted from an exurb west of Philadelphia, through Philadelphia, and on to Cherry Hill NJ. Chicago also has commuters from three states: Illinois, Wisconsin, and Indiana.
And don’t forget that there are many reverse commuters who go from the central city to jobs outside the city, especially as more and more companies build facilities outside the central city.
Many of these commuters have no real property, they rent their living spaces. So, where do their local loyalties lie: where they live or where they work. They only get input into the laws that affect where they work is through federal law, not state laws. The only way they have input into the affairs of the state in which they work is through personal contact with acquaintances who are residents of their work state or letters to the editor of the regional newspaper.
The electoral college could give our co-workers more or less clout in an election than we have. The Delaware resident who works in Philadelphia had a greater weighted Electoral College vote than his or her colleagues who live in Pennsylvania! It’s almost like saying that short people have more votes than tall people!
"Would we truly want large regional majorities from the two coasts to alone choose our president? The system of checks and balances left to us by the Founders is the surest guarantee of protecting minority rights that we have.” - J. Craig Scherf
But do we want small regional electoral majorities to take away the rights of the majority of the whole nation?
Thursday, November 10, 2016
The election was stolen, really!
Who stole it?
All those eligible voters who didn't show up. They are the one's who had no confidence in Donald Trump as president, but they couldn't bring themselves to vote for Hillary Clinton. Many of these believed Trump's accusations against Clinton even though they disbelieved everything else Trump said.
Consider that an extra 50,000 votes total in just three states would have given Clinton the election.
See "For Reeling Democrats, Now What?", Cathleen Decker, Los Angeles Times, 2016-11-10,
Were you one of these 50,000 non-voters? Did you steal the election? Did you help rig the election?
The only way you throw your vote away is to stay away.
Be sure to vote in 2018 to bring about a better balance in Congress.
Thursday, April 14, 2016
Thought of the day; 2016 election turnout
See”Trump or Cruz? Why It Doesn’t Matter Anymore for the GOP, Fiscal Times, 2016-04-14,
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-cruz-why-doesn-t-174800466.html.
Now the trick is that those who would vote Democratic don’t stay away because they don’t like Sanders or Clinton. In fact, a huge Democratic turnout and a huge Republican stay-away are needed to give support to Sanders or Clinton.
Remember my mantra: If you stay away you throw your vote away!
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-cruz-why-doesn-t-174800466.html.
Now the trick is that those who would vote Democratic don’t stay away because they don’t like Sanders or Clinton. In fact, a huge Democratic turnout and a huge Republican stay-away are needed to give support to Sanders or Clinton.
Remember my mantra: If you stay away you throw your vote away!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)