Donald Trump and US politics

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

Proportional representation is much better. Governments usually consist of different coalitions (Germany saw conservative/liberal, social democratic/liberal, Social democratic/green, now conservative/social democratic and probably in a few weeks or months conservative/liberal/green) and compromise is necessary.

Proportional representation is rooted in Republicanism. As in a division of powers between state and local governments. That's basically what the USA started as, but as time has went on, we've become more of a Federal Democracy than a Republic. Rampant Federalism does nothing but create more division, and political partisanship. That creates an adversarial environment.

"

People who cheat while golfing cannot be trusted in anything else. Honesty is the truest measure of what it is to be a real man. Only losers cheat.

Giving someone a handicap in golfing isn't cheating. That's commonly done so players of different skill levels can play each other.

I used to go to a pool hall, but I wasn't very good, and some of the guys gave me a 3 ball advantage because of how bad I sucked. That was fair, because if I missed a shot they were likely to run the table on me.

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

http://www.pewglobal.org/2017/06/26/u-s-image-suffers-as-publics-around-world-question-trumps-leadership/

When I first looked at this, I was surprised, a small majority of people worldwide would say they "dislike American ideas about democracy".

Spoiler

But then I realized that a two party system is only a little better than a one party system. Also the direct vote of the president has lead to someone unqualified as a leader.

It is not a good system. Proportional representation is much better. Governments usually consist of different coalitions (Germany saw conservative/liberal, social democratic/liberal, Social democratic/green, now conservative/social democratic and probably in a few weeks or months conservative/liberal/green) and compromise is necessary.

Polls are rarely trustworthy these days. Hillary Clinton can attest to that, as can Pew itself.



https://www.imediaethics.org/first-gallup-then-pew-afraid-of-election-polls/
http://www.pewresearch.org/2016/10/10/why-pew-research-center-changed-its-strategy-this-election/

Polls rely on people being honest. With the Big Brother state and the vociferous left, many people who mistrust the pollsters, so they don't give them accurate information.

The majority voted for Clinton.

The U.S. system is flawed.

Just another proof.

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

The majority voted for Clinton.

The U.S. system is flawed.

Just another proof.

actually no, the Electoral college is the only reason why the US are still united. Most states would leave because they have a lower density of population and their voice would never be heard. The proplems in the Vermont aren't the same as the problems in California, therefore Vermont would be forgotten if it was a pure democracy.

It's not flawed it's working as intented, it keep the USA united and working together. Pure democracy only works when it's a very small population such as a council in a company where every boss vote for decisions. But when it come to a whole nation with a very big population, and you add that the geography, pure democracy never worked and will never work.

If pure democracy was installed in the USA in the following years 2/3 of the states would leave.

That is a reality. And Trump won, the rules were fixed and he won following the rule, stop being salty trying to change the rule after the election because you lost it.

"

MrSmiley21 wrote:

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

Proportional representation is much better. Governments usually consist of different coalitions (Germany saw conservative/liberal, social democratic/liberal, Social democratic/green, now conservative/social democratic and probably in a few weeks or months conservative/liberal/green) and compromise is necessary.

Proportional representation is rooted in Republicanism. As in a division of powers between state and local governments. That's basically what the USA started as, but as time has went on, we've become more of a Federal Democracy than a Republic. Rampant Federalism does nothing but create more division, and political partisanship. That creates an adversarial environment.

I live in Germany, a federal democracy with 16 states and a system of proportional representation(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation).

You say flawed, I say working as intended. The U.S. is not a democracy, it is a representative democratic republic.

Everybody knew this going into the election; it is only an issue now because their cheating, dishonest, racist, sexist, corrupt, evil shill didn’t play the right game. A bit disengenuous if you ask me—but what else should I expect?

"

diablofdb wrote:

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

The majority voted for Clinton.

The U.S. system is flawed.

Just another proof.

actually no, the Electoral college is the only reason why the US are still united. Most states would leave because they have a lower density of population and their voice would never be heard. The proplems in the Vermont aren't the same as the problems in California, therefore Vermont would be forgotten if it was a pure democracy.

It's not flawed it's working as intented, it keep the USA united and working together. Pure democracy only works when it's a very small population such as a council in a company where every boss vote for decisions. But when it come to a whole nation with a very big population, and you add that the geography, pure democracy never worked and will never work.

If pure democracy was installed in the USA in the following years 2/3 of the states would leave.

That is a reality. And Trump won, the rules were fixed and he won following the rule, stop being salty trying to change the rule after the election because you lost it.

We have this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundesrat_of_Germany and this https://www.bundesfinanzministerium.de/Content/DE/Standardartikel/Themen/Oeffentliche_Finanzen/Foederale_Finanzbeziehungen/Laenderfinanzausgleich/Eng-Der-Bundesstaatliche-FAG.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=1.

Helps.

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

The majority voted for Clinton.

The U.S. system is flawed.

Just another proof.

If you count the votes that weren't legal, she did receive more votes. If you back out 5-8.5 million in likely fraudulent votes, she didn't. In any case, the system worked exactly as it was intended to, and the pollsters were wrong far beyond any popular vote vs electoral vote discrepancy.

The US System is designed to protect rights, including those of the states. Without the states, there would be no union, and no authority for the federal government to operate. If the US directly elected all officials and had an overwhelmingly powerful federal government, a lot of progress would have been stifled. Federal judges would have been curtailed in power long ago. Things like California's vehicle emission laws would have never been permitted. Equality in marriage, would never have stood a chance, because the federal government would have shut states and judges down.

Many of the 'rights' citizens have under the Constitution were derived from States' rights or three way battles between the states, the federal government and corporate rights.


The U.S. System is fine, the flaw was in the DNC's steadfast determination to run a completely untrustworthy scandal ridden robot like candidate.