President Donald Trump

88chaz88 said:
I might be, quite understandably, wrong here, but don't you vote for a senator, governor, and representative in the electoral college? What common vote are you talking about?
Click to expand...
When I made my original statement I did not specify I was talking about the Presidential election primarily and the popular (common) vote. I did not think States had any say in that and this is what I stated to @Stu. So it is possible we have all been talking about something that is different. If True I guess that solves It, if not please let me know how you think I am wrong and I will address it.
The information Stu provided does line up in my mind with my original statement.
 
Eventhorizon said:
When I made my original statement
Eventhorizon said:
One of the things I understand team Trump is working on are federal ID's to vote. No I'D and you don't vote in any government election.
I hope this gets implemented before the next Presidential election. It seems like it will solve most of America's issues.
Click to expand...

I did not specify I was talking about the Presidential election primarily and the popular (common) vote. I did not think States had any say in that and this is what I stated to @Stu. So it is possible we have all been talking about something that is different. If True I guess that solves It, if not please let me know how you think I am wrong and I will address it.
The information Stu provided does line up in my mind with my original statement.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I can't understand a word you are saying.
You seem so defensive about not knowing what you are talking about that you are becoming unintelligible.
There is no "common vote" or "popular vote" not in the way you are using the terminology.
There is voting, and there are voting rights.
 
The Federal Gov cannot dictate who gets to vote, it only has the constitutional power to protect the voting rights of citizens over the age of 18, from being denied the right to vote based on race, gender, age or servitude. And only in elections specified in the constitution.
 
Stu said:
Sorry, I can't understand a word you are saying.
You seem so defensive about not knowing what you are talking about that you are becoming unintelligible.
There is no "common vote" or "popular vote" not in the way you are using the terminology.
There is voting, and there are voting rights.
Click to expand...
Defensive? No, just answering a question. But yes you are correct, I did say any "government" election. I overlooked I made that particular comment and admit I am wrong on that account. I know what I was trying to say but said something different.
Score one for you.

Regarding popular vote...again I was thinking of the Presidential election.
 
And again, you would be wrong.
 
Stu said:
And again, you would be wrong.
Click to expand...
About What? The popular vote? Remember how Hillary won the popular vote? Surely you remember that.
 
You say Team Trump is working on a Federal Gov ID for voting in "all govt elections". I am trying to point out that the idea of it would require an amendment to the US constitution. @Eventhorizon
I am pointing out that thinking that they can simply mandate it is unconstitutional. I am pointing out that one of your hopes for the future of this nation is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how the country works. [period]
 
Stu said:
You say Team Trump is working on a Federal Gov ID for voting in "all govt elections". I am trying to point out that the idea of it would require an amendment to the US constitution. @Eventhorizon
I am pointing out that thinking that they can simply mandate it is unconstitutional. I am pointing out that one of your hopes for the future of this nation is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how the country works. [period]
Click to expand...
Yes. I now see that and that in the way I stated my original post I am indeed wrong. I thought I already said that.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Yes. I now see that and that in the way I stated my original post I am indeed wrong. I thought I already said that.
Click to expand...
Just out of curiosity, what are you actually trying to convey?
 
If the state legislators in say New Mexico passed a law allowing any living, human the right to vote, in a presidential election, and the governor signed it and the NM state courts held it a consistent with the NM state constitution, the Federal gov would have no legal way to stop them.
 
Stu said:
Just out of curiosity, what are you actually trying to convey?
Click to expand...
Simply implementing proof of American citizenship before being allowed to vote for Presidential elections. I have to admit I thought that would apply to any related State congressional seats as well. Very surprised it does not.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Simply implementing proof of American citizenship before being allowed to vote for Presidential elections. I have to admit I thought that would apply to any related State congressional seats as well. Very surprised it does not.
Click to expand...
Do you see that it does not necessarily apply to even Presidential elections?
 
Stu said:
If the state legislators in say New Mexico passed a law allowing any living, human the right to vote, in a presidential election, and the governor signed it and the NM state courts held it a consistent with the NM state constitution, the Federal gov would have no legal way to stop them.
Click to expand...
That never occurred to me until you mentioned it here. Looking, I can see nothing that indicates this can't happen.
This has been informative.
 
88chaz88 said:
That despite being admittedly wrong, he's still right somehow.
Click to expand...
Wow. Its not even good enough for you when someone admits they were or are wrong.
What would be good enough for You? Should I take my own life after writting a note saying how dissatisfied I am with life after finding out I was finally wrong about something?
 
Eventhorizon said:
Wow. Its not even good enough for you when someone admits they were or are wrong.
What would be good enough for You? Should I take my own life after writting a note saying how dissatisfied I am with life after finding out I was finally wrong about something?
Click to expand...
Ok,now let's take a closer look at the alleged crimes of the former Secretary of State regarding her emails.
 
Stu said:
Ok,now let's take a closer look at the alleged crimes of the former Secretary of State regarding her emails.
Click to expand...
Theres really no need. Plus this is a Presidential thread. Not a washed up Secretary of State soon to be jailed thread.
 
Could the fact that the Trump Administration is not pursuing criminal action be based on the fact that, like so much of their rhetoric, it is in fact baseless political pandering to a core group of ill informed followers?
 
Stu said:
Could the fact that the Trump Administration is not pursuing criminal action be based on the fact that, like so much of their rhetoric, it is in fact baseless political pandering to a core group of ill informed followers?
Click to expand...
Anything is possible. My understanding though is that it's not a Presidential administration choice to peruse it. Only a choice whether to pardon or not depending on whats found in the investigation. That or potentially a choice to ask the DOJ to reopen a closed case. Though admittedly I dont know if thats possible in a legal sense. They can't really peruse it. Only make choices depending on what the DOJ ultimately states or recommends.

So while I may have said it at some point I never believed Trump himself was going to send Hillary to jail. I simply thought of it as him making sure the road blocks to such a potential action would be removed from where they were already placed.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Wow. Its not even good enough for you when someone admits they were or are wrong.
Click to expand...

Not when you claim without any substance to be right, after being proven wrong, and it took almost an entire page of your unintelligible ramblings 'till I'm guessing you realised that Stu just wasn't buying it and finally admitted fault.

It took an incredible amount of time for you to admit that you didn't know what you were talking about, you delayed your admission to the point where it's no longer worth anything, and it really doesn't go near enough to make up for the amount of misinformation you've consistently spread around.

All this, and you still haven't gotten to the point of Stu's issue. Where you continually called the 44th president a traitor and un-American without any substance, and yet don't even realise that what you're hoping the 45th president will do would require an amendment or be unconstitutional. Shit, for someone so apparently interested in politics and the running of your country, how the hell can you know so little about it?

And the most infuriating thing? Whenever you're caught out on your bullshit you attempt to use every tool you can to deflect any criticism. Through running around idiotic logic puzzles that make no sense to anyone other than yourself, hiding behind liberal pleasantries with "There wasn't any call for that." Followed by "You're not being nice so I'm going home." To just flat out denial.

And I'm kicking myself because I'm doing a @Stu and @invisible and giving you more time than you deserve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top