Donald Trump, US President #47, US President #45, convicted felon, twice impeached, four times indicted, liable of rape, convicted for financial fraud, guilty of hiding hush money payments to porn actress in attempt to influence 2016 elections

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Donald Trump, US President #47, US President #45, convicted felon, twice impeached, four times indicted, liable of rape, convicted for financial fraud, guilty of hiding hush money payments to porn actress in attempt to influence 2016 elections

1 | ... | 298 | 299 | 300 | 301 | 302 | 303 | 304 | 305 | 306 | 307 | 308 | ... | 2486

1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 887
Inactive user

#1720331 15-Feb-2017 00:55

Geektastic:

tdgeek:

Rikkitic:

What is the ratio again? For everyone who bothers to sign a petition, another 100 agree with it. Or something like that.

I don't see that at all. You would need just a mere 1% to establish a 100% agreement.

There will be many or some that agree but don't sign, but they cannot be very strong with that agreement, if they can't be bothered signing. Its a numbers game, nothing can be implied.

In this day and age, there will also be a proportion who sign just because other people they know signed and they do not want to be the only non-joiners...

Combined with the fact that clicking a quick mouse button etc is not much of an effort and you'll certainly have a another proportion who aren't THAT bothered but it was easy to do and their husband, wife, partner, girlfriend or whatever was doing it so they thought they would.

Compare it with the Countryside March when Blair was banning fox hunting: 300,000 - 400,000 actual people (depending on who's count you believe) turned up in London (i.e. the entire population of Wellington!) to the largest protest rally Britain had ever seen - and they were ignored...! I would not really expect an online petition to be much more than opium for the masses.

Different era..cant compare.

Benoire

2880 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 689

#1720364 15-Feb-2017 06:47

tdgeek:

There is often a bias, that does not represent the desire of the populous. Compulsory voting is the answer.

Compulsory voting will only work in my opinion if the actual voting population understands the need and importance of voting itself. The whole concept of being a citizen and your civic duties needs to be reinforced in our education system so that children at their very youngest understand that when coming of voting age that it is critical for democracy to work, and then keep this up through their education to reinforce. I guess a similar concept to social studies but needs to consider how voting impacts on the way we live and the laws we create... IF we just implement compulsory voting we'll still have the same voter disengagement we have now but with more people trying to avoid voting illegally!

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1720366 15-Feb-2017 07:13

Benoire:

tdgeek:

There is often a bias, that does not represent the desire of the populous. Compulsory voting is the answer.

Compulsory voting will only work in my opinion if the actual voting population understands the need and importance of voting itself. The whole concept of being a citizen and your civic duties needs to be reinforced in our education system so that children at their very youngest understand that when coming of voting age that it is critical for democracy to work, and then keep this up through their education to reinforce. I guess a similar concept to social studies but needs to consider how voting impacts on the way we live and the laws we create... IF we just implement compulsory voting we'll still have the same voter disengagement we have now but with more people trying to avoid voting illegally!

Agree. Voting coud become a "damn I have to vote today" rather than a duty to NZ

Sideface

9662 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15653

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1720372 15-Feb-2017 08:12

Rikkitic:

What is the ratio again? For everyone who bothers to sign a petition, another 100 agree with it. Or something like that.

There are two concurrent UK petitions, both due to be debated on 20 February:

Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom. 1,856,847 signatures
Donald Trump should make a State Visit to the United Kingdom. 310,416 signatures

(Today's figures)

Note the ratio of 6 to 1.

Sideface

dafman

4057 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2656

Trusted

#1720398 15-Feb-2017 08:52

Sideface:

Just received from Petitions: UK Government and Parliament

"You’re receiving this email because you signed this petition: “Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom.”.

"Dear #####,

"The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom.”.

HM Government believes the President of the United States should be extended the full courtesy of a State Visit. We look forward to welcoming President Trump once dates and arrangements are finalised.
HM Government recognises the strong views expressed by the many* signatories of this petition, but does not support this petition.
During her visit to the United States on 27 January 2017, the Prime Minister, on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen, invited President Trump for a State Visit to the UK later this year. The invitation was accepted. This invitation reflects the importance of the relationship between the United States of America and the United Kingdom. At this stage, final dates have not yet been agreed for the State Visit.

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

This petition has over 100,000 signatures. The Petitions Committee will consider it for a debate. They can also gather further evidence and press the government for action.
The Committee is made up of 11 MPs, from political parties in government and in opposition. It is entirely independent of the Government.

Thanks,
The Petitions team
UK Government and Parliament

* More than 1.8 million Brits signed this petition.

On the positive, let's cross fingers that the Brits put on some monumental street protests to welcome him.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18777 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12769

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1720400 15-Feb-2017 08:59

Compulsory voting in my view breeches one of the foundations of a free society.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1720410 15-Feb-2017 09:12

MikeB4: Compulsory voting in my view breeches one of the foundations of a free society.

I can see that. However, there should also be zero chatter about who only got 25% of the vote.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18777 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12769

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1720412 15-Feb-2017 09:18

tdgeek:

MikeB4: Compulsory voting in my view breeches one of the foundations of a free society.

I can see that. However, there should also be zero chatter about who only got 25% of the vote.

That is also a foundation of a free society. If I were in the USA and faced with either voting for Clinton or Trump I would have exercised with right and abstained from voting. That does not remove my right to express an opinion on the final selection.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Geektastic

18012 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8470

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1720444 15-Feb-2017 10:28

MikeB4:

tdgeek:

MikeB4: Compulsory voting in my view breeches one of the foundations of a free society.

I can see that. However, there should also be zero chatter about who only got 25% of the vote.

That is also a foundation of a free society. If I were in the USA and faced with either voting for Clinton or Trump I would have exercised with right and abstained from voting. That does not remove my right to express an opinion on the final selection.

Agreed; however it inevitably leads to your opinion being given less weight I suspect.

Theoretically I guess that if everyone abstained and no votes were cast, the parties would have to field alternative candidates. However, of course, that would never happen as at least one person would vote - so if one of the two candidates got the single vote that was cast, they would still have won the election....!

Paul1977

5171 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2192

#1720452 15-Feb-2017 10:51

MikeB4:

If I were in the USA and faced with either voting for Clinton or Trump I would have exercised with right and abstained from voting.

And that reasoning is probably why Trump won. They were both terrible candidates, but one was clearly worse than the other. I firmly believe that if those who didn't vote had chosen to go along and vote for the "lesser of two evils", Trump would not have one.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18777 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12769

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1720453 15-Feb-2017 10:55

Paul1977:

MikeB4:

If I were in the USA and faced with either voting for Clinton or Trump I would have exercised with right and abstained from voting.

And that reasoning is probably why Trump won. They were both terrible candidates, but one was clearly worse than the other. I firmly believe that if those who didn't vote had chosen to go along and vote for the "lesser of two evils", Trump would not have one.

I disagree with voting for the lesser of two evils. I have on occasion not cast a candidate vote in the General election as I did not like any of the candidates, it did however cast party votes. Abstaining is a legitimate voting choice.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Paul1977

5171 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2192

#1720471 15-Feb-2017 11:09

MikeB4:

Paul1977:

MikeB4:

If I were in the USA and faced with either voting for Clinton or Trump I would have exercised with right and abstained from voting.

And that reasoning is probably why Trump won. They were both terrible candidates, but one was clearly worse than the other. I firmly believe that if those who didn't vote had chosen to go along and vote for the "lesser of two evils", Trump would not have one.

I disagree with voting for the lesser of two evils. I have on occasion not cast a candidate vote in the General election as I did not like any of the candidates, it did however cast party votes. Abstaining is a legitimate voting choice.

It is a valid choice, and like you I generally only cast a party vote - mainly because it seems to me the local representative doesn't seem to do much of anything regardless of who it is.

However, I think this is quite an unusual case. I mean... Donald J. Trump? This is one instance where one candidate was so awful that I would have been compelled to vote against him.

But regardless of whether abstaining is a valid choice or not, I still maintain that Trump would not have won if the non-voters had turned out and voted for who the felt was the "lesser of the two evils".

MikeB4

MikeB4
18777 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12769

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1720475 15-Feb-2017 11:15

Paul1977:

It is a valid choice, and like you I generally only cast a party vote - mainly because it seems to me the local representative doesn't seem to do much of anything regardless of who it is.

However, I think this is quite an unusual case. I mean... Donald J. Trump? This is one instance where one candidate was so awful that I would have been compelled to vote against him.

But regardless of whether abstaining is a valid choice or not, I still maintain that Trump would not have won if the non-voters had turned out and voted for who the felt was the "lesser of the two evils".

A better electoral choice for Americans I feel was their feet and the Canadian border.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19086 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16356

Lifetime subscriber

#1720499 15-Feb-2017 11:22

Apparently many refugees who originally chose America are now illegally crossing into Canada, sometimes at great risk to their lives.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Geektastic

18012 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8470

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1720511 15-Feb-2017 11:44

Rikkitic:

Apparently many refugees who originally chose America are now illegally crossing into Canada, sometimes at great risk to their lives.

From bears? Surely not from Canadians.

1 | ... | 298 | 299 | 300 | 301 | 302 | 303 | 304 | 305 | 306 | 307 | 308 | ... | 2486