Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | ... | 730
Mad Scientist
19799 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2674

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1696041 29-Dec-2016 08:42
Send private message quote this post

JWR:

 

joker97:

 

Time will tell

 

He was who the Americans chose as their next Presdident

 

Can't have democracy and then not want it

 

 

 

 

Actually, they didn't.

 

The Electoral College chose Trump as the President.

 

Americans don't vote directly for president.

 

They only get to express a preference.

 

The overall preference was for Hillary (by 2-3 million).

 

 

Democracy is not kindergarten math.

 

Democracy - It's a process, and the process has a scoreboard attached to it.

 

You can't say actually the referee gave the black caps a win over the proteus, the black caps shouldn't have won because of this and that.





Swype on iOS is detrimental to accurate typing. Apologies in advance.


15334 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2979

Trusted

  Reply # 1696044 29-Dec-2016 08:57
Send private message quote this post

joker97:

 

JWR:

 

joker97:

 

Time will tell

 

He was who the Americans chose as their next Presdident

 

Can't have democracy and then not want it

 

 

 

 

Actually, they didn't.

 

The Electoral College chose Trump as the President.

 

Americans don't vote directly for president.

 

They only get to express a preference.

 

The overall preference was for Hillary (by 2-3 million).

 

 

Democracy is not kindergarten math.

 

Democracy - It's a process, and the process has a scoreboard attached to it.

 

You can't say actually the referee gave the black caps a win over the proteus, the black caps shouldn't have won because of this and that.

 

 

Fully agree. There is a rule. If you dont like it, change the rule. It happened here, popular vote one year was higher for the loser. Social Credit always polled heaps, never got a seat, until Beetham eventually won one as he was very cool. We now have a form of proportional representation. US elections are often 51.5% vs 49.5%, in tbis case it was 46% vs 48%, still close


 
 
 
 


7993 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4329


  Reply # 1696071 29-Dec-2016 09:47
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

JimsonWeed:

 

I think ol' Donald is going to surprise a lot of people.  Yeah, he's quite arrogant but, he's also connected to a lot of people.  The US is already seeing the market economy better than it's been in the last 8 years.  I just hope that trend continues.  There's not doubt he will fix a lot of things but at the same time, he'll also piss off a lot of people doing it. 

 

The thing that got me was all the "mud-slinging" that took place against the backdrop of fake news.  The media made all manner of predictions and upset a large segment of the population.  Actually, they did quite well in dividing the country.  Honestly, I don't think there was anything that one side didn't attack the other with.

 

The latest fad is for people to go on and on about the popular vote but, they fail to understand what it actually means.  The electoral college was established to prevent a single state (or region) from becoming the seat of power over the whole of the country.  Just imagine if population density was the deciding factor in New Zealand.  All one would need to do is campaign heavily in Auckland and the poor folks in Dunedin would just have to suck up the outcome of the election.  There wouldn't really even be a need to go down there and talk to them.

 

Ok, ok... lecture mode off but... I figured Trump to win sometime back around September.  Hillary maybe be have been a poor candidate but, Obama blew her chances out of the water.

 

Peace!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wait on...

 

Trump and his supporters are claiming responsibility for economic recovery data that has NOTHING to do with Trump at all.  They're stating "thanks Trump" and Trump's even twittering to  thank himself - when he's done absolutely nothing at all.

 

Honestly - there hasn't been a more dishonest scumbag elected in US history - he also carries the distinction of being the president elect with lowest approval rating.

 

I completely reject your assertion that "the media" did quite well in dividing the country - Trump did it all himself - have you forgotten his filthy campaigning, "Mexican Rapists", racist fear-mongering, birtherism, endorsing violence, misogyny, failure to reject endorsement by the KKK etc?  Should the US media have ignored all of those comments?

 

As for the electoral college - I suspect that you fail to understand what it means - so here's a simple graphic:

 

 

Petulant Trump's response to Clinton's 2.8 million vote majority in the popular vote was:

 

"I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people that voted illegally"

 

Worse than a sore loser is a sore winner.  

 

 


2678 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1294

Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1696101 29-Dec-2016 11:38
Send private message quote this post

Fred99:

 

I completely reject your assertion that "the media" did quite well in dividing the country - Trump did it all himself - have you forgotten his filthy campaigning, "Mexican Rapists", racist fear-mongering, birtherism, endorsing violence, misogyny, failure to reject endorsement by the KKK etc?  Should the US media have ignored all of those comments?

 

 

Ummm... There's no problem about dividing the country; the whole point of an election is to divide the country into "those who support A" and "those who support B" so that you can count who has the most support. The problem is that there's a whole lot of labeling and baggage attached to either decision. And that the US democratic system produced two almost equally bad candidates, and the media quite rightly pointed out the badness in them.

 

 

As for the electoral college - I suspect that you fail to understand what it means - so here's a simple graphic:

 

 

But what's the problem with this? It is *designed* to be like that, and enshrined in the Constitution. Although "1-man 1-vote" is a fine principle, there are aspects which aren't so great; for example, legalised oppression of minorities is possible. In this case, the minorities (people living in less populous states) are being protected. Whether that protection is warranted is a Constitutional matter.

 

 

Petulant Trump's response to Clinton's 2.8 million vote majority in the popular vote was:

 

"I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people that voted illegally"

 

 

Yeah... Trump's correct response would have been "It's irrelevant". If he truly believes that 2.8M+ people (and probably many more... surely *all* illegal votes couldn't have been for Clinton?) voted illegally, then the correct response is to tighten up the processes to prevent people from voting illegally. The fact that he's not making a song and dance about it suggests that he doesn't believe it himself (i.e. that it's a comment plucked out of thin air *because* it's impossible to prove true or false), and/or that he really doesn't care about the democratic system.

 

 


Awesome
4841 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1096

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1696159 29-Dec-2016 13:13
Send private message quote this post

frankv:

 

 

 

But what's the problem with this? It is *designed* to be like that, and enshrined in the Constitution. Although "1-man 1-vote" is a fine principle, there are aspects which aren't so great; for example, legalised oppression of minorities is possible. In this case, the minorities (people living in less populous states) are being protected. Whether that protection is warranted is a Constitutional matter.

 

But you already have proportional representation in both the house and the senate. The presidency should be chosen by the popular vote. Has this been the case and Hillary was president, she would still have had to deal with a minority in both chambers just as Obama has. The president themselves can't achieve all that much on their own, they mostly can only influence. And the issue with Trump is that while congress might be able to limit some of the damage he can do legislatively, he's a shoot first ask questions never kind of guy with the nuclear football and a seemingly unvetted social media presence. His dangers are mostly diplomatic - but that alone can be a huge problem.





Twitter: ajobbins


Mad Scientist
19799 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2674

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1696163 29-Dec-2016 13:26
Send private message quote this post

Fred99:

JimsonWeed:


I think ol' Donald is going to surprise a lot of people.  Yeah, he's quite arrogant but, he's also connected to a lot of people.  The US is already seeing the market economy better than it's been in the last 8 years.  I just hope that trend continues.  There's not doubt he will fix a lot of things but at the same time, he'll also piss off a lot of people doing it. 


The thing that got me was all the "mud-slinging" that took place against the backdrop of fake news.  The media made all manner of predictions and upset a large segment of the population.  Actually, they did quite well in dividing the country.  Honestly, I don't think there was anything that one side didn't attack the other with.


The latest fad is for people to go on and on about the popular vote but, they fail to understand what it actually means.  The electoral college was established to prevent a single state (or region) from becoming the seat of power over the whole of the country.  Just imagine if population density was the deciding factor in New Zealand.  All one would need to do is campaign heavily in Auckland and the poor folks in Dunedin would just have to suck up the outcome of the election.  There wouldn't really even be a need to go down there and talk to them.


Ok, ok... lecture mode off but... I figured Trump to win sometime back around September.  Hillary maybe be have been a poor candidate but, Obama blew her chances out of the water.


Peace!


 



 


Wait on...


Trump and his supporters are claiming responsibility for economic recovery data that has NOTHING to do with Trump at all.  They're stating "thanks Trump" and Trump's even twittering to  thank himself - when he's done absolutely nothing at all.


Honestly - there hasn't been a more dishonest scumbag elected in US history - he also carries the distinction of being the president elect with lowest approval rating.


I completely reject your assertion that "the media" did quite well in dividing the country - Trump did it all himself - have you forgotten his filthy campaigning, "Mexican Rapists", racist fear-mongering, birtherism, endorsing violence, misogyny, failure to reject endorsement by the KKK etc?  Should the US media have ignored all of those comments?


As for the electoral college - I suspect that you fail to understand what it means - so here's a simple graphic:



Petulant Trump's response to Clinton's 2.8 million vote majority in the popular vote was:


"I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people that voted illegally"


Worse than a sore loser is a sore winner.  


 



We live in a post-truth era




Swype on iOS is detrimental to accurate typing. Apologies in advance.


126 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 4
Inactive user


  Reply # 1696167 29-Dec-2016 13:33
Send private message quote this post

I appreciate all the responses - thank you, kindly.  It's always good to listen to other people's opinions on matters.

With regard to a couple comments though;

As for the electoral college - I suspect that you fail to understand what it means - so here's a simple graphic:

But what's the problem with this? It is *designed* to be like that, and enshrined in the Constitution. Although "1-man 1-vote" is a fine principle, there are aspects which aren't so great; for example, legalised     oppression of minorities is possible. In this case, the minorities (people living in less populous states) are being protected. Whether that protection is warranted is a Constitutional matter.

"1 man, 1 vote" is a great concept but unfortunately, people tend to cluster in cities these days.  This is especially true of minorities.  You don't generally find large collectives of minorities living in rural America.  There is very little industry to sustain any kind of a life-style unless you inherited it from way back in time.  All it takes is for a shift in the prime rate of a couple points and suddenly people cannot make their mortgage payments.  Anyhow... most of the large cities traditionally swing Democrat (i.e., liberal) and politicians have been taking advantage of the block vote concept for years.  It's only happened a couple of times that a candidate won the popular but lost the election to the electoral college.  It's a process that was established well over 200 hundred years ago and it has seemingly worked well throughout that time.

 

 


126 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 4
Inactive user


  Reply # 1696168 29-Dec-2016 13:41
Send private message quote this post

ajobbins:

 

frankv:

 

 

 

But what's the problem with this? It is *designed* to be like that, and enshrined in the Constitution. Although "1-man 1-vote" is a fine principle, there are aspects which aren't so great; for example, legalised oppression of minorities is possible. In this case, the minorities (people living in less populous states) are being protected. Whether that protection is warranted is a Constitutional matter.

 

But you already have proportional representation in both the house and the senate. The presidency should be chosen by the popular vote. Has this been the case and Hillary was president, she would still have had to deal with a minority in both chambers just as Obama has. The president themselves can't achieve all that much on their own, they mostly can only influence. And the issue with Trump is that while congress might be able to limit some of the damage he can do legislatively, he's a shoot first ask questions never kind of guy with the nuclear football and a seemingly unvetted social media presence. His dangers are mostly diplomatic - but that alone can be a huge problem.

 

 

Actually, the POTUS can do quite a lot by way of what's called "Executive Order".  Still though... you're right.  Trump with the football :)  Yeah, don't be fooled for a minute... I don't think he would have any compunction to turn some country into a sheet of glass if they muck with him.  I don't think he is any different than Truman or Churchill in that regard. 


12552 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4157

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1696191 29-Dec-2016 14:38
Send private message quote this post

JimsonWeed:

 

I appreciate all the responses - thank you, kindly.  It's always good to listen to other people's opinions on matters.

With regard to a couple comments though;

As for the electoral college - I suspect that you fail to understand what it means - so here's a simple graphic:

But what's the problem with this? It is *designed* to be like that, and enshrined in the Constitution. Although "1-man 1-vote" is a fine principle, there are aspects which aren't so great; for example, legalised     oppression of minorities is possible. In this case, the minorities (people living in less populous states) are being protected. Whether that protection is warranted is a Constitutional matter.

"1 man, 1 vote" is a great concept but unfortunately, people tend to cluster in cities these days.  This is especially true of minorities.  You don't generally find large collectives of minorities living in rural America.  There is very little industry to sustain any kind of a life-style unless you inherited it from way back in time.  All it takes is for a shift in the prime rate of a couple points and suddenly people cannot make their mortgage payments.  Anyhow... most of the large cities traditionally swing Democrat (i.e., liberal) and politicians have been taking advantage of the block vote concept for years.  It's only happened a couple of times that a candidate won the popular but lost the election to the electoral college.  It's a process that was established well over 200 hundred years ago and it has seemingly worked well throughout that time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You'll see the same thing in the UK and probably here - if you look at a map coloured red and blue (with the traditional affiliations of those colours) then cities are almost always red and the entire countryside almost always blue.






2678 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1294

Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1696216 29-Dec-2016 15:53
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

ajobbins:

 

The presidency should be chosen by the popular vote.

 

 

Why? What is so magical about the popular vote that it preempts any other way of selecting a leader?

 

Just because the system ended up electing Trump instead of Clinton doesn't mean the system is wrong. Not even if *you* prefer Clinton.

 

The Americans have chosen that system for Presidential elections. They have to live with it, or they can change it. It's pointless saying that under some other system someone else would have been elected. And especially pointless to say that because Trump was elected, there's something wrong with the electoral system.

 

 


2678 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1294

Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1696221 29-Dec-2016 16:11
Send private message quote this post

JimsonWeed:

 

I appreciate all the responses - thank you, kindly.  It's always good to listen to other people's opinions on matters.

With regard to a couple comments though;

As for the electoral college - I suspect that you fail to understand what it means - so here's a simple graphic:

But what's the problem with this? It is *designed* to be like that, and enshrined in the Constitution. Although "1-man 1-vote" is a fine principle, there are aspects which aren't so great; for example, legalised     oppression of minorities is possible. In this case, the minorities (people living in less populous states) are being protected. Whether that protection is warranted is a Constitutional matter.

"1 man, 1 vote" is a great concept but unfortunately, people tend to cluster in cities these days.  This is especially true of minorities.  You don't generally find large collectives of minorities living in rural America.  

 

 

I think you've misunderstood. In this case, the minority is defined by race or religion, but by geography. In the US, people who live in unpopulous states (e.g. Wyoming, Vermont) are a minority which is protected in various ways (State lawmaking rights, the same number of Senators as other States, and disproportionate power in electing Presidents). So it would be very difficult for a bunch on Californians to (for example) impose a speed limit on Wyoming.

 

 


126 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 4
Inactive user


  Reply # 1696240 29-Dec-2016 18:13
Send private message quote this post

frankv:

 

JimsonWeed:

 

I appreciate all the responses - thank you, kindly.  It's always good to listen to other people's opinions on matters.

With regard to a couple comments though;

As for the electoral college - I suspect that you fail to understand what it means - so here's a simple graphic:

But what's the problem with this? It is *designed* to be like that, and enshrined in the Constitution. Although "1-man 1-vote" is a fine principle, there are aspects which aren't so great; for example, legalised     oppression of minorities is possible. In this case, the minorities (people living in less populous states) are being protected. Whether that protection is warranted is a Constitutional matter.

"1 man, 1 vote" is a great concept but unfortunately, people tend to cluster in cities these days.  This is especially true of minorities.  You don't generally find large collectives of minorities living in rural America.  

 

 

I think you've misunderstood. In this case, the minority is defined by race or religion, but by geography. In the US, people who live in unpopulous states (e.g. Wyoming, Vermont) are a minority which is protected in various ways (State lawmaking rights, the same number of Senators as other States, and disproportionate power in electing Presidents). So it would be very difficult for a bunch on Californians to (for example) impose a speed limit on Wyoming.

 

 

 

I will have to respectfully disagree with you.  Under the concept of 1 person, 1 vote (i.e., the popular vote), population density would define the laws and the powers of the land.  We can argue it back and forth but, it's a known fact and that's the very reason the electoral vote is the deciding factor.  It's not really an issue that can be debated.  It's a proven fact that relying solely on the popular vote, population density will rule the country. 

 

On the matter of laws... you have city government, county government, state government, and federal government.  Not all states are structured in the same way either.  Likewise, federal law generally supersedes any of the other lower courts.  For example, Cannabis is illegal at the federal level but, the federal government chooses to allow each state determine it's own will.  These mayors who are refusing to hand over illegal aliens are not in jeopardy of any criminal prosecution but, the federal government can, and probably will, withhold funding for a myriad of social programmes.  The effects of this are usually felt when the incumbent decides to run for office on the next term.   Bzzzt... gone!  Now... just in case you're going to rebuff my "illegal alien" comment, please bear in mind that very, very few countries will tolerate over-stays or illegal immigrants so, it's not like the US is being mean to a bunch of people wanting a better life.  There is a process to achieving that goal.

 

Reflecting on the sparsely populated areas of Wyoming, Colorado, Montana, and places like that... some people own 1,000's and 1,000's of acres of land and would never part with it for the sake of bring more people into the area.  Besides, unless you're really into freezing cold weather and limited employment opportunities, the best you would probably ever want to do is carry a sack lunch, enjoy the view, and head off some place else.  :)   Incidentally, the federal government can impose a national speed limit across all states with no trouble at all.  President Jimmy Carter was the one who put the 55mph speed limit into effect across the nation.  The very day he left office, highway workers were changing the signs to 80mph.

 

Great discussion though.  It's good to be able to hold opposing view without ending up in the ditch in a bloody brawl :)

 

 


126 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 4
Inactive user


  Reply # 1696242 29-Dec-2016 18:16
Send private message quote this post

 

Why? What is so magical about the popular vote that it preempts any other way of selecting a leader?

 

Just because the system ended up electing Trump instead of Clinton doesn't mean the system is wrong. Not even if *you* prefer Clinton.

 

The Americans have chosen that system for Presidential elections. They have to live with it, or they can change it. It's pointless saying that under some other system someone else would have been elected. And especially pointless to say that because Trump was elected, there's something wrong with the electoral system.

 

 

 

 

Exactly!  I just hope and pray that the US election doesn't set the standard around the globe for the way elections should be held.  That was truly some sad mess we all just witnessed.


15334 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2979

Trusted

  Reply # 1696244 29-Dec-2016 18:27
Send private message quote this post

JimsonWeed:


Why? What is so magical about the popular vote that it preempts any other way of selecting a leader?


Just because the system ended up electing Trump instead of Clinton doesn't mean the system is wrong. Not even if *you* prefer Clinton.


The Americans have chosen that system for Presidential elections. They have to live with it, or they can change it. It's pointless saying that under some other system someone else would have been elected. And especially pointless to say that because Trump was elected, there's something wrong with the electoral system.



 


Exactly!  I just hope and pray that the US election doesn't set the standard around the globe for the way elections should be held.  That was truly some sad mess we all just witnessed.



What sad mess?

JWR

751 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 238


  Reply # 1696247 29-Dec-2016 18:33
One person supports this post
quote this post

joker97:

 

JWR:

 

joker97:

 

Time will tell

 

He was who the Americans chose as their next Presdident

 

Can't have democracy and then not want it

 

 

 

 

Actually, they didn't.

 

The Electoral College chose Trump as the President.

 

Americans don't vote directly for president.

 

They only get to express a preference.

 

The overall preference was for Hillary (by 2-3 million).

 

 

Democracy is not kindergarten math.

 

Democracy - It's a process, and the process has a scoreboard attached to it.

 

You can't say actually the referee gave the black caps a win over the proteus, the black caps shouldn't have won because of this and that.

 

 

Black Caps, Proteus... Who cares! It isn't relevant to voting.

 

Mathematics is more important than any of us! The Cosmos can be described by Mathematics'

 

However, I don't think they teach it in kindergarten.

 

Democracy, I am not so sure about. I don't claim to know what it is.

 

It is an idealistic thing.

 

Is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea democratic? or any number of 'dictators' elected with 97-98% of the votes ( usually in that range).

 

Is America democratic when their votes for President only express a preference? 

 

 


1 | ... | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | ... | 730
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic


Donate via Givealittle


Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

A call from the companies providing internet access for the great majority of New Zealanders, to the companies with the greatest influence over social media content
Posted 19-Mar-2019 15:21


Two e-scooter companies selected for Wellington trial
Posted 15-Mar-2019 17:33


GeForce GTX 1660 available now
Posted 15-Mar-2019 08:47


Artificial Intelligence to double the rate of innovation in New Zealand by 2021
Posted 13-Mar-2019 14:47


LG demonstrates smart home concepts at LG InnoFest
Posted 13-Mar-2019 14:45


New Zealanders buying more expensive smartphones
Posted 11-Mar-2019 09:52


2degrees Offers Amazon Prime Video to Broadband Customers
Posted 8-Mar-2019 14:10


D-Link ANZ launches D-Fend AC2600 Wi-Fi Router Protected by McAfee
Posted 7-Mar-2019 11:09


Slingshot commissions celebrities to design new modems
Posted 5-Mar-2019 08:58


Symantec Annual Threat Report reveals more ambitious, destructive and stealthy attacks
Posted 28-Feb-2019 10:14


FUJIFILM launches high performing X-T30
Posted 28-Feb-2019 09:40


Netflix is killing content piracy says research
Posted 28-Feb-2019 09:33


Trend Micro finds shifting threats require kiwis to rethink security priorities
Posted 28-Feb-2019 09:27


Mainfreight uses Spark IoT Asset Tracking service
Posted 28-Feb-2019 09:25


Spark IoT network now covers 98% of New Zealand population
Posted 19-Feb-2019 09:28



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.