a Trump vs Clinton United States Presidential Election in 2016

Who do you vote into the office of USA President?

  • Total voters
    48
Necronic

Necronic

Staff member
The crazy thing is that I'm actually for ending it. It's absurd that it goes up to 1 million. And it rarely has any impact on us normal folk out there. I make a pretty solid living and it doesn't do a thing for me, or most people. But it is a super unpopular position.

Remember, most republicans are just temporarily embarrassed millionaires. And millionaires are not fans of this.
 
Sara_2814

Sara_2814

Necronic said:
The crazy thing is that I'm actually for ending it. It's absurd that it goes up to 1 million. And it rarely has any impact on us normal folk out there. I make a pretty solid living and it doesn't do a thing for me, or most people. But it is a super unpopular position.

Remember, most republicans are just temporarily embarrassed millionaires. And millionaires are not fans of this.
Click to expand...
Planet Money talked about getting rid of the deduction (plus a few others). It's apparently part of the reason for the insane housing prices.
 
Necronic

Necronic

Staff member
I think it's possible for them to eliminate the most egregious aspects of the mortgage interest deduction without it hurting very many people. Taking out the 4-500k plus "jumbo" mortgages for one, and tightening the restrictions on deductions from multiple houses (I believe there are some ways to use that deduction if you own more than one house).
 
strawman

strawman

Michigan recount has stopped due to a federal order. Multiple court cases continue, so it may be restarted.

There's an interesting allegation of precinct voting fraud:



I don't know this person, but it's a continuation of stuff the clerk suggested when the recounts started. If the pollbook doesn't match the ballot, then the entire precinct cannot be recounted and the original count remains standing, combine this with the problems experienced with the voting machines:

He blamed the discrepancies on the city’s decade-old voting machines, saying 87 optical scanners broke on Election Day. Many jammed when voters fed ballots into scanners, which can result in erroneous vote counts if ballots are inserted multiple times. Poll workers are supposed to adjust counters to reflect a single vote but in many cases failed to do so, causing the discrepancies, Baxter said.
Click to expand...
Until I read about this, I thought the elections here in michigan were relatively difficult to hack. Scantron type forms, sealed machines, and many poll workers means it would be hard to pull off significant fraud.

However it appears that it's not that hard at all, and there's a loophole. The machine can't tell if one ballot has been run through the machine more than once, and apparently poll workers have the ability to adjust the machine counts.

All that said, the allegation of 50 ballots having been run through a single machine enough times to count as 306 ballots in one precinct is startling.

The fact that this can happen, but if found out during a recount wouldn't be rectified (original provably faulty count stands) is sobering in a state where Hillary lost by only ~11k votes. I would have expected that a recount would resolve irregularities, rather than simply using the original numbers.

Keep in mind, however, that this is a facebook post from a republican supporter (one of michigan's electors for the dec 19 vote) and could be fake news. As stated in the detroit news article above about the recount "A federal judge Wednesday suspended a recount of the Nov. 8 presidential election that started three days ago and has yet to reveal fraud or significantly alter the results." ie, no official recognition of fraud has been declared, even though Jill Stein's recount efforts are specifically intended to audit the voting process.

The court ruling is interesting, particularly this part:

“But invoking a court’s aid to remedy that problem in the manner plaintiffs have chosen — seeking a recount as an audit of the election to test whether the vulnerability led to actual compromise of the voting system — has never been endorsed by any court, and would require, at a minimum, evidence of significant fraud or mistake — and not speculative fear of them. Such evidence has not been presented here.”
Click to expand...
It's hard to know whether fraud is occurring on a big enough scale to matter, and this is really throwing my assumption that the voting system is capable of reflecting the desires of the voters...
 
Fun Size

Fun Size

stienman said:
Michigan recount has stopped due to a federal order. Multiple court cases continue, so it may be restarted.

There's an interesting allegation of precinct voting fraud:



I don't know this person, but it's a continuation of stuff the clerk suggested when the recounts started. If the pollbook doesn't match the ballot, then the entire precinct cannot be recounted and the original count remains standing, combine this with the problems experienced with the voting machines:



Until I read about this, I thought the elections here in michigan were relatively difficult to hack. Scantron type forms, sealed machines, and many poll workers means it would be hard to pull off significant fraud.

However it appears that it's not that hard at all, and there's a loophole. The machine can't tell if one ballot has been run through the machine more than once, and apparently poll workers have the ability to adjust the machine counts.

All that said, the allegation of 50 ballots having been run through a single machine enough times to count as 306 ballots in one precinct is startling.

The fact that this can happen, but if found out during a recount wouldn't be rectified (original provably faulty count stands) is sobering in a state where Hillary lost by only ~11k votes. I would have expected that a recount would resolve irregularities, rather than simply using the original numbers.

Keep in mind, however, that this is a facebook post from a republican supporter (one of michigan's electors for the dec 19 vote) and could be fake news. As stated in the detroit news article above about the recount "A federal judge Wednesday suspended a recount of the Nov. 8 presidential election that started three days ago and has yet to reveal fraud or significantly alter the results." ie, no official recognition of fraud has been declared, even though Jill Stein's recount efforts are specifically intended to audit the voting process.

The court ruling is interesting, particularly this part:



It's hard to know whether fraud is occurring on a big enough scale to matter, and this is really throwing my assumption that the voting system is capable of reflecting the desires of the voters...
Click to expand...
The fact that we have a law on the books that says "If it looks tampered with then we won't recount it" strikes me as so completely *$%#ing backward, and basically has completely disenfranchised me from the entire process. I'll still vote every time I'm supposed to, but the idea that doing so matters has taken a serious hit.
 
Gruebeard

Gruebeard

Fun Size said:
The fact that we have a law on the books that says "If it looks tampered with then we won't recount it" strikes me as so completely *$%#ing backward, and basically has completely disenfranchised me from the entire process. I'll still vote every time I'm supposed to, but the idea that doing so matters has taken a serious hit.
Click to expand...
Please verify that law's existence before doing this. As @stienman said, this could be fake news lies.

(PS - ftfy, stieny)
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

stienman said:
The fact that this can happen, but if found out during a recount wouldn't be rectified (original provably faulty count stands) is sobering in a state where Hillary lost by only ~11k votes. I would have expected that a recount would resolve irregularities, rather than simply using the original numbers.
Click to expand...
Well, it's
In other news...
Wells Fargo Asks Court to Force Customers to Arbitration in Fake Accounts Cases
So basically, because customers signed the agreement on their original account, they cannot sue the bank for all the fake accounts that were opened in their names and must instead submit to arbitration to resolve their grievances.
So, you know, even in a case where there IS definite, demonstrable fraud, you still can't take it to the courts.
stienman said:
It's hard to know whether fraud is occurring on a big enough scale to matter, and this is really throwing my assumption that the voting system is capable of reflecting the desires of the voters...
Click to expand...
Hear, hear.

--Patrick
 
strawman

strawman

Gruebeard said:
Please verify that law's existence before doing this. As @stienman said, this could be fake news lies.

(PS - ftfy, stieny)
Click to expand...
It's pretty widely reported during the recount and could have resulted in nearly half of detroit's votes not being eligible for recount.

http://www.freep.com/story/news/pol...bers-means-precincts-cant-recounted/95015066/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...idential-recount-mismatched-numbers/95031324/
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2016/12/05/recount-unrecountable/95007392/
https://mic.com/articles/161347/mic...-questions-in-detroit-wayne-county#.wGzHdW3az

I'm not going to take the time to verify the law myself, but michigan laws are available online.
 
strawman

strawman

Gruebeard said:
Okay then: y'all got some fucked up election system down there.
Click to expand...
Most other errors would allow a recount, but pollbook errors means that the ballots in the box may be fraudulent themselves, so a recount won't fix that.

It's not a perfect solution to the problem of pollbook errors, but it's better than throwing the votes out entirely.
 
Eriol

Eriol

Krisken said:
In other words, we will never know if there was fraud because there is no definitive proof of fraud and they can't look for it without that proof. Pretty circular if you ask me.
Click to expand...
I don't mean this flippantly, but this sounds a LOT like the same logic why you shouldn't need ID to vote. At least that's what went through my head when I read it. From a place that DOES require ID to vote (mostly, it's complicated).
 
Krisken

Krisken

Eriol said:
I don't mean this flippantly, but this sounds a LOT like the same logic why you shouldn't need ID to vote. At least that's what went through my head when I read it. From a place that DOES require ID to vote (mostly, it's complicated).
Click to expand...
It is flippant, because no one said you shouldn't need ID to vote (the counter argument is the ID should be FREE, easy to get, and not require a place of residence). There's nothing circular there.

Being this is about the same ballots being used over and over and not by individual voters, you are mixing the fraud types up. 1 voter going to multiple places = stupid and pointless, 1 ballot being used 50+ times is more concerning.
 
JCM

JCM

A guy who does not believe in global warming in charge of the environment, a guy against unions and wage increases to the inflation level in charge of labor and a guy who believes in conspiracies in charge of defense.

It's like watching a Bizzaro world comic play out in real life.
 
Frank

Frank

JCM said:
A guy who does not believe in global warming in charge of the environment, a guy against unions and wage increases to the inflation level in charge of labor and a guy who believes in conspiracies in charge of defense.

It's like watching a Bizzaro world comic play out in real life.
Click to expand...
He doesn't just believe in conspiracies, he has MULTIPLE times passed on classified information when he was not supposed to (AND PROUD OF IT!).

No wonder Russia wants Trump in charge. They'll have access to the US nuclear arsenal within the first week. Not because he's in their pocket, but that he'll tweet out the door codes to the buildings or something and Gen. Flynn will mail them the football after being dared by Putin that he couldn't.
 
Last edited:
Frank

Frank



Also, yes, one of the biggest electoral college victories in history. The 46th biggest in fact. Of 58.

Also, good to know your president and his advisers are publicly shitting on the CIA. I mean, who would know better about meddling in another country's elections?
 
Last edited:
Frank

Frank

It seriously fucking blows my mind. Your future REPUBLICAN president's staff are shitting on your international intelligence agency in order to defend fucking Russia.
 
Null

Null

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-climate-idUSKBN13Y2R6

President-elect Donald Trump's Energy Department transition team sent the agency a memo this week asking for the names of people who have worked on climate change and the professional society memberships of lab workers, alarming employees and advisors.
The memo sent to the Energy Department on Tuesday and seen by Reuters on Friday, contains 74 questions including a request for a list of all department employees and contractors who attended the annual global climate talks hosted by the United Nations within the last five years.
It asked for a list of all department employees or contractors who have attended any meetings on the social cost of carbon, a measurement that federal agencies use to weigh the costs and benefits of new energy and environment regulations. It also asked for all publications written by employees at the department's 17 national laboratories for the past three years.
"This feels like the first draft of an eventual political enemies list," said a Department of Energy employee, who asked not to be identified because he feared a reprisal by the Trump transition team.
 
ScytheRexx

ScytheRexx

More and more I hope the electors renegade. I hate the precedent that would set, but at this point I would prefer it over Trump and this disaster of a cabinet.

What makes me sick is still how this happened. All the fake news, the misinformation, the "war on truth" were Trump loonies believe facts are not more important then "feelings".

It blows my mind.
 
Hailey Knight

Hailey Knight

I get you, but I'm still wary over the precedent. On the one hand, it's what the EC is for and it has zero other redeeming factors. On the other hand, I feel like this would be paving the way for a bad thing in the future.

I don't think it should be Clinton after everything though. There's gotta be a compromise that isn't Trump, but I couldn't see his supporters accepting anything less than this disaster.
 
Ravenpoe

Ravenpoe

Zero Esc said:
I get you, but I'm still wary over the precedent. On the one hand, it's what the EC is for and it has zero other redeeming factors. On the other hand, I feel like this would be paving the way for a bad thing in the future.

I don't think it should be Clinton after everything though. There's gotta be a compromise that isn't Trump, but I couldn't see his supporters accepting anything less than this disaster.
Click to expand...
I know things are fucked up when I find myself honestly thinking Ted Cruz would be a better choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top