Fake votes? You are so conned by Trump or too stupid to understand our election system. You are so sad.
Donald Trump Has Not Won a Majority of the Votes Cast for President — His popular vote has fallen below 50% as his margin over Kamala has narrowed con
- Thread starter NakedHunterBiden
- Start date
cawacko
Well-known member
That's something isn't it?
At the end of the day I don't think it means much. If voters don't like what you are doing they'll let you know during the next election, regardless of whether you think you have a 'mandate' or not. (And you remember the '94 midterms. That was a blood bath and the Republicans regained the House for the first time in decades. So much for that Clinton 'mandate' huh?!)
Exactly. And I remember it well. Made it difficult then, and impossible now for a Blue-dog to get elected in Oklahoma. For 30+ years I think governing from the edges has cost both parties…and the country.
Who won?Donald Trump Has Not Won a Majority of the Votes Cast for President — His popular vote has fallen below 50% as his margin over Kamala has narrowed considerably as more votes counted.
Donald Trump Has NOT Won a Majority of the Votes Cast for President
Donald Trump’s popular vote total has fallen below 50 percent, and his margin over Kamala Harris has narrowed considerably as all the votes are counted.www.thenation.com
Trump’s victory was not of “epic” or “historic” proportions. There was no “landslide” for the once and future president, as Fox News suggested repeatedly in postelection headlines. The election did not produce the “decisive victory” for Trump that the Associated Press referred to in the immediate aftermath of the voting. Nor did it yield the “resounding defeat” for Harris that AP reported at the same time.
That won’t matter to Trump, who claimed a mandate even when he lost the 2016 popular vote by almost 3 million ballots. Four years later, Trump refused to accept his defeat by more than 7 million votes, and denied that majority support for Biden in the 2020 election amounted to anything akin to a mandate.
These numbers are better for the Democrats than what was recorded on election night, and that many pundits continue to suggest. That does not mean, however, that a clearer picture of the results should dissuade the Democrats from looking for ways to reform their party. Even if the margins are narrower than initially imagined, it is still the case that the party failed to beat Trump and a Republican Party that embraces the destructive politics not just of its presidential candidate but of the billionaire class. This is a time for serious reflection on mistakes that were made, and on challenges going forward, as part of a needed examination of how to build a multiracial, multiethnic working-class coalition that can win decisively, and not just at the presidential level but also in the struggle to regain control of the House and Senate in 2026.
What the numbers do provide Democrats and progressives, however, is an argument against despair and surrender, especially as the debate opens over Trump’s cabinet picks, judicial nominees, and legislative priorities.
“Research suggests that mandate claims, despite their tenuous connection to reality, can be effective in affecting legislative behavior,” notes Julia Azari, the associate professor of political science at Marquette University who authored Delivering the People’s Message: The Changing Politics of the Presidential Mandate. “Political science studies show that legislators will change their behavior in response to the perception of a mandate election—but only for so long.”
The first months of Trump’s presidency will go a long way toward defining the character of his second term. Democrats and a handful of thoughtful Republicans have the potential to temper Trump’s worst excesses, and to assure that the constitutionally mandated system of checks and balances is maintained. When Trump pushes back against congressional oversight by claiming that his appointments and policies reflect the will of the electorate, members of the House and Senate can counter that specious claim by explaining that the majority of the American people did not vote for him.
You were correct, it is all in the eyes of the beholder, and each side has their own understanding, and at different times, but, and there always a but, objectively it would seem to imply at least one more than half at a minimum
NakedHunterBiden
Joyeuses fêtes !
Not by much..
IBDaMann
Well-known member
ExpressLane
Verified User
Is Trump still the President elect? 
BartenderElite
Verified User
Is Trump still the President elect?
Without doubt. But you know Trump - this is the biggest win in the history of mankind.
Personally, I think he has a mandate because of the GOP winning both houses, and him being the 1st Republican to win the popular in many years. But, it's not a huge win in the popular. It's not the mandate HE thinks it is.
And the way he's spending political capital on fairly small battles so far, it won't be a mandate that lasts too long.
volsrock1
Verified User
ADreamOfLiberty
Verified User
but forged ballots don't have mandate juice
BartenderElite
Verified User
Did they find forged ballots? I haven't seen a story on that.
ADreamOfLiberty
Verified User
Yea you wouldn't admit to the existence of statistics last time we tried this.
BartenderElite
Verified User
I didn't really understand the question you were asking. I'd admit something I understood, but truthfully, that was too complicated for me.
But do stats prove forged ballots?
IBDaMann
Well-known member
The majority who voted for Trump believe he has a mandate. Those who believe that the US is a democracy have to go with that.
Besides, if we look at it from a purely real estate point of view, i.e. the land of the US and the States who own said land, Donald Trump won this election 73.52% to 26.48%, just a hair under 3-to-1. I like looking at it that way. I'll go with that.
... and you can't read minds; you don't know what he thinks.
After Trump just bitch-slapped Kriminala in the manner that he did, and considering how you have gotten everything wrong up to this point, you nonetheless see fit to critique Donald Trump's strategy? You have got to be fucking kidding me.
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Your use of the word "prove" shows that you don't understand the significance of statistical math or of the proper usage of the word "prove."
ADreamOfLiberty
Verified User
Statistical projection by definition proves nothing.
You take a drop of water from the sea and you count the plankton in it. What does that tell you about how many plankton there are in the sea? What does that prove about the number of plankton in the sea?
