Bitter Clintons snub Trumps at Bush funeral

Trump's courts will last a generation, and he'll likely get at least one more Supreme Court nominee by the time he leaves. That's way more important than whatever liberals are whining about today...

 

Irrelevant, as we are not a democracy.

 

You can't listen to both of them at the same time.

 

I can't listen to either of them at one time. Talking heads are a useless drain on society.

 

As you are fully aware, the aggregate popular vote total is completely irrelevant.
So...
Trump received 304 votes, 34% more than his closest opponent.
How is that not a landslide?

 

Aside from your opinion having no basis in fact...
No western democracy popularly elects its head of government.

 

Trump received 304 electoral votes and Clinton garnered 227
Take it up with the founding fathers.

 

What on earth does that have to do with Trump and Clinton? Neither of them is (or ever was - thanks to alleged "bone spurs" - in the military). He is still calling her names. It isn't something that happened 75 years ago.

He is the one who is demonstrating a lack of class by calling her names. She didn't do anything inappropriate at the funeral.

 

This missed his point by the breadth of Trump's ass.

The electoral college was meant to be a check and balance on a populace making poor choices. In practice, the electors from each state have traditionally voted for the winner of the popular vote from their state.

They failed to follow the spirit of their duties in the last election.

 

No. His "point" is that Hillary received a higher aggregate popular vote total than Trump, which everyone knows is irrelevant.

Given the number of faithless Clinton electors, I'd say they followed that duty just fine.

 

Yet you elected the guy who said that lol

 

If you consider more people voting for his opponent than him to be a landslide I guess you're right.

 

Oh it’s not my opinion, it’s trumps

 

Trump received 304 votes, 34% more than his closest opponent.
Thus, landslide.

 

This, of course, changes nothng
Aside from your opinion having no basis in fact...
No western democracy popularly elects its head of government.

 

yeah whatever. keep injecting.

 

You can characterise that as a landslide amongst the electoral college. Trump certainly didn't receive a landslide endorsement from the American people.

 

As you are fully aware, the aggregate popular vote total is completely irrelevant.
Thus, landslide.

 

Irrelevant to whether he wins the presidency. Not irrelevant to how many Americans support him.

 

And thus, irrelevant with regard to the accuracy of characterizing his victory as a landslide.

 

5 switched from Clinton, and 2 switched theirs from Trump; hardly a surge of "faithless electors".

 

What people don't understand about origanlists like Justice Scalia is that he wanted the Congress to write the laws...not the Courts. So if Trump's picks are origalists in the mode of Scalia, The Democrats can hold Congress for the next 10 years. Time to get plenty of legislation passed.

 

Hmm. You talked about electors having a duty to protect the electorate from poor choices, and then scoff at the fact 5 Hillary electors did just that?

 

No, I didn't "scoff" at anything, except the notion that "the number" of faithless electors switching from Clinton was somehow large.

 

Never claimed it was, just that there were several.
The electoral college worked as intended, as it always does.