Dog Brothers Public Forum

HOME | PUBLIC FORUM | MEMBERS FORUM | INSTRUCTORS FORUM | TRIBE FORUM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
January 20, 2017, 04:06:50 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
99677 Posts in 2354 Topics by 1083 Members
Latest Member: TuhonBill
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities
| |-+  Politics & Religion
| | |-+  The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] Print
Author Topic: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.  (Read 152554 times)
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 645


« Reply #650 on: December 02, 2016, 08:21:38 PM »

http://www.mcall.com/news/local/elections/mc-lehigh-vote-recanvassingrecovered-wed-nov-30-161059-2016--20161130-story.html

A FB poster comments:

"In other words: the Green Party wanted a copy of the county's election software so its computer experts could be sure the system had not been manipulated with virus-borne malware that could alter voters' intended choices." The Gr$$n party wanted a COPY OF THE SOFTWARE USED IN VOTING MACHINES?!?! Is this normal? I have been told time and time again by liberals there is no such thing as voter fraud, and now they want the software to check for evidence that doesn't exist? The democrats look more and more awesome by the day, can't wait for the bloodbath that will be their huge senate losses in 2018."

Is this a fair point?  

HOW CAN THE VALIDITY OF VOTING BY COMPUTER BE VERIFIED?

I've touched on this before.

Computer experts that work in the industry have testified before Congress, admitting that it can be rigged... easily.

There have been reliable instances where this has happened and the machines have switched votes.

People have asked for the software, but the companies will NOT release it.

Democrats have done everything they can to prevent voter ID and the voting machine companies are owned by primarily liberals and backed by Soros himself, so any mishaps have ALWAYS benefitted them, which is why they fight voter reform vehemently, labeling it as "voter discrimination" in spite of the fact that poorer countries have implemented 100% voter ID and paper ballots specifically to prevent the problems going on.

None of this is news. The Democrats depend on it, and while they claim that Clinton won the popular vote, they can't count paper ballots or prove that non citizens DIDN'T vote, both of which should be something that people can prove. A computer on the other hand, will tell you anything you want it to, at any given point in time.... if you know how to manipulate it.

Edit: I forgot to add.... it gets worse. Liberals talk about Russia hacking the elections and Clinton's emails, while COMPLETELY leaving alone the fact that voting machines used in US elections aren't even made by companies in the States, but instead in liberal countries like Spain and Canada, who WILL NOT release their software.

The US is being stolen.

36 million non citizens in the US and NO ONE can prove that they didn't all vote, when they have so much to gain. I defy anyone to prove they did not vote. Makes me so mad I could f ing spit.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2016, 08:27:00 PM by DDF » Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #651 on: December 03, 2016, 04:25:05 PM »

Highly unreliable site, but worth keeping an eye out for this.

http://occupydemocrats.com/2016/12/03/wisconsin-recount-officials-just-found-five-counting-machines-tampered-seals/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #652 on: December 09, 2016, 12:24:23 AM »

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/12/08/thanks-jill-michigan-house-passes-voter-id-bill-after-vote-fraud-hyperbole/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #653 on: December 09, 2016, 01:02:33 AM »

http://alexanderhiggins.com/vote-fraud-12-michigan-hillary-vote-disqualified-recount/
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #654 on: December 09, 2016, 07:55:32 AM »

I think it was Rush who pointed out that for about 90 minutes on election night the mainstream media went completely SILENT on the voting counts .  Rush stated he spoke to a pollster who noticed the same thing (he did not mention who the pollster was but I suspect it was Pat Caddell - but i am just guessing).  The pollster stated they stopped reporting when Trump was clearly ahead  because the Democrat machine went into high gear actively "looking" for votes for Hillary.  Remember that night when John King would keep saying that Hillary's only chance was to "find " enough big city (urban) votes to counter the more suburban rural Trump votes?

It seemed obvious to me that the DEms were hustling as many votes as much as they can .   Funny how the elections always come down to those same urban areas that are usually the last to report.

Will be hear this on MSM?  

No;  fraud ? what fraud?  or this one I love ,"voter fraud is exceedingly rare".
« Last Edit: December 09, 2016, 08:09:18 AM by ccp » Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 645


« Reply #655 on: December 09, 2016, 08:47:02 AM »


I'm shocked.
Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #656 on: December 09, 2016, 03:00:04 PM »

This guy is a community organizer till the last breath.  What a self serving sicko:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-orders-full-review-of-2016-election-hacking-171014046.html
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #657 on: December 09, 2016, 04:00:05 PM »

from sparta news :

AFter the Jill Stein re count in Michigan found fraud in Detroit the Michigan house passed voter ID legislation.  Let see if the MSM picks THIS up.   rolleyes

https://www.spartareport.com/2016/12/thanks-stein-strict-voter-id-bill-passes-michigan-house-heads-michigan-senate/
Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 645


« Reply #658 on: December 09, 2016, 07:16:54 PM »

from sparta news :

AFter the Jill Stein re count in Michigan found fraud in Detroit the Michigan house passed voter ID legislation.  Let see if the MSM picks THIS up.   rolleyes

https://www.spartareport.com/2016/12/thanks-stein-strict-voter-id-bill-passes-michigan-house-heads-michigan-senate/

I'll bet you taco dinner that they don't.
Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #659 on: December 09, 2016, 11:58:37 PM »

Looking for a quality citation for this , , ,
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #660 on: December 10, 2016, 01:43:46 AM »

second post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-orders-review-of-russian-hacking-during-presidential-campaign/2016/12/09/31d6b300-be2a-11e6-94ac-3d324840106c_story.html?utm_term=.8f4a9aba0759&wpisrc=al_alert-COMBO-politics%252Bnation
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #661 on: December 10, 2016, 12:34:37 PM »

I have no doubt this theme, "the vast Russian conspiracy" will re energize the Clinton mob to keep in the game.  I don't know if she could win a 2020 nomination but there is zero doubt the door will be open for them to try and keep that on the slow burn.

The DOJ should appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the Clintons.  They will not go away quietly.

If this intell claim is true , and I am dubious , especially coming out while Brock is still in,  it is cause for concern.  But the way I see it the release of hacked info was of info that was all TRUE and not reported or investigated by a purposely negligent LEFT wing MSM.

When we look at the totality of the information that came out from all sources the wikileaks stuff merely partially balanced out the slander from the LEFT.
And again it was all true.  Russia if it did do so, did the US public a service by exposing proof of the LEFTS corruption suspected by all of us all along.

The community organizer will play this up to protect his legacy.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #662 on: December 10, 2016, 08:45:24 PM »

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/12/10/founding-fathers-russia-election-interference-means-electoral-college-reject-trump.html
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #663 on: December 10, 2016, 09:33:27 PM »

Question?

Should Trump stay magnanimous and concentrate on simply reversing Brock and his vindictive team or should he fight back?

They are doing every thing they can to delegitimize him.

Not sure the answer.   The best thing for him to succeed is to "make America great" .  Then those who are too young to know anything other then the Brock will learn he was not such a big deal after all.

OTOH by then the LEFT amy well devastate Trump even before he is out of the gate.



Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #664 on: December 11, 2016, 08:57:02 AM »

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/10/13/the-long-history-of-the-u-s-interfering-with-elections-elsewhere/?utm_term=.8c9382b722e2
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #665 on: December 11, 2016, 01:46:44 PM »

Well what are these allegations?  That Putin hacked in to both DNC and RNC and only released DNC stuff?
What about the Clinton emails?

I have not heard any thing alleged that disputes the information released was not true though I few Dems are of course making such suggestions.

The concept that Russia may have selectively released information that exposes real corruption is one to ponder.  Because if any of this is true then that basically is what they did.

They did the job our media refuses to do. 

Would it have been ok if they just release information revealing corruption on both sides?  Would it not be ok and allow the corruption to go silent?

Just wondering.

Maybe we should just do the same to Putin.  Can we?  Just release the truth.

Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 645


« Reply #666 on: December 11, 2016, 07:02:10 PM »

Well what are these allegations?  That Putin hacked in to both DNC and RNC and only released DNC stuff?
What about the Clinton emails?

I have not heard any thing alleged that disputes the information released was not true though I few Dems are of course making such suggestions.

The concept that Russia may have selectively released information that exposes real corruption is one to ponder.  Because if any of this is true then that basically is what they did.

They did the job our media refuses to do. 

Would it have been ok if they just release information revealing corruption on both sides?  Would it not be ok and allow the corruption to go silent?

Just wondering.

Maybe we should just do the same to Putin.  Can we?  Just release the truth.



Exactly. The media could care less about the content of what was released, other than it damages the politicians they support. AFAIC, if true, Russia dd nothing different than the US has done countless times. I care more about Clinton and other Americans trashing the law, thinking they're the ruling "elite." NO love for them at all.
Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8490


« Reply #667 on: December 12, 2016, 10:42:52 AM »

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/251544/
To the extent that it was a Russian hack, it was mostly due to Hillary and other Democrats’ exercising criminal negligence in matters of security. That’s hardly an argument that she should have been President.
-------------

The cheating uncovered involved debate moderators giving questions in advance to one candidate, Hillary Clinton.  Also debate moderator Megyn Kelly admittedly trying to take out one candidate in the first question of a debate.

What are the penalties for these violations of the process?
« Last Edit: December 12, 2016, 10:47:45 AM by DougMacG » Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8490


« Reply #668 on: December 13, 2016, 04:50:34 PM »

 “Yesterday I learned that releasing hacked — but true — emails is a threat to democracy, but suborning electors to reverse an election is not.”

 https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14260


« Reply #669 on: December 13, 2016, 09:02:47 PM »

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2016/12/12/records-many-votes-detroits-precincts/95363314/

Records: Too many votes in 37% of Detroit’s precincts
Joel Kurth and Jonathan Oosting , The Detroit News 1:31 p.m. EST December 13, 2016


State Elections Director Chris Thomas explains a state audit of 20 precincts in Detroit where ballot boxes contained fewer votes than counted in the election poll book. Chad Livengood, The Detroit News



Voting machines in more than one-third of all Detroit precincts registered more votes than they should have during last month’s presidential election, according to Wayne County records prepared at the request of The Detroit News.

Detailed reports from the office of Wayne County Clerk Cathy Garrett show optical scanners at 248 of the city’s 662 precincts, or 37 percent, tabulated more ballots than the number of voters tallied by workers in the poll books. Voting irregularities in Detroit have spurred plans for an audit by Michigan Secretary of State Ruth Johnson’s office, Elections Director Chris Thomas said Monday.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #670 on: December 19, 2016, 04:22:51 PM »

Obviously in that this is Pravda on the Hudson, caveat lector

How a Putin Fan Overseas Pushed Pro-Trump Propaganda to Americans

By MIKE McINTIREDEC. 17, 2016
Dowson, a far-right political activist, ran a constellation of websites out of the United Kingdom. Credit Rex Features, via Associated Press

The Patriot News Agency website popped up in July, soon after it became clear that Donald J. Trump would win the Republican presidential nomination, bearing a logo of a red, white and blue eagle and the motto “Built by patriots, for patriots.”

Tucked away on a corner of the site, next to links for Twitter and YouTube, is a link to another social media platform that most Americans have never heard of: VKontakte, the Russian equivalent of Facebook. It is a clue that Patriot News, like many sites that appeared out of nowhere and pumped out pro-Trump hoaxes tying his opponent Hillary Clinton to Satanism, pedophilia and other conspiracies, is actually run by foreigners based overseas.

But while most of those others seem be the work of young, apolitical opportunists cashing in on a conservative appetite for viral nonsense, operators of Patriot News had an explicitly partisan motivation: getting Mr. Trump elected.

Patriot News — whose postings were viewed and shared tens of thousands of times in the United States — is among a constellation of websites run out of the United Kingdom that are linked to James Dowson, a far-right political activist who advocated Britain’s exit from the European Union and is a fan of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia. A vocal proponent of Christian nationalist, anti-immigrant movements in Europe, Mr. Dowson, 52, has spoken at a conference of far-right leaders in Russia and makes no secret of his hope that Mr. Trump will usher in an era of rapprochement with Mr. Putin.

===================================
Recent Comments
Bill Casey 17 hours ago

My mother, who is 72 years old and grew up in a time when you could trust what you read, joined Facebook this year. She was hesitant to vote...
Boston Comments 19 hours ago

Gawd, I can barely grasp at words after reading this superb piece of reportage. I'm old enough to remember the McCarthy era -- and although...
J T 19 hours ago

Why am I not surprised this former "church minister in Northern Ireland," whose religious justifications for his actions are repeatedly...
=========================


His dabbling in the American presidential election adds an ideological element that has been largely missing from the still-emerging landscape of websites and Facebook pages that bombarded American voters with misinformation and propaganda. Far from the much-reported Macedonian teenagers running fake news factories solely for profit, Mr. Dowson made it his mission, according to messages posted on one of his sites, to “spread devastating anti-Clinton, pro-Trump memes and sound bites into sections of the population too disillusioned with politics to have taken any notice of conventional campaigning.”
Photo
An image from one of Mr. Dowson’s websites. He said his mission was to “spread devastating anti-Clinton, pro-Trump memes and sound bites.”

“Together, people like us helped change the course of history,” one message said, adding in another: “Every single one of you who forwarded even just one of our posts on social media contributed to the stunning victory for Trump, America and God.”

In a recent email interview from Belgrade, where he has met with Serbian nationalists, Mr. Dowson explained how his decision to establish an American social media presence was similar to the move into European markets by Breitbart News, the conservative provocateur media operation run by Stephen K. Bannon, Mr. Trump’s chief strategist.

“Simple truth is that after 40 years of the right having no voice because the media was owned by the enemy, we were FORCED to become incredibly good at alternative media in a way the left simply can’t grasp or handle,” Mr. Dowson said. “Bottom line is: BREXIT, TRUMP and much more to follow.”

While it is easy to overstate the influence of fringe elements whose overall numbers remain very small, the explosion of fake news and propaganda sites and their possible impact on the presidential election have ignited alarm across the American political spectrum. A recent study found that most people who read fabricated stories on Facebook — such as a widely circulated hoax about Pope Francis endorsing Mr. Trump — were inclined to believe them.

Then there is the added element of Russian meddling. The Central Intelligence Agency has concluded that Moscow put its thumb on the scale for Mr. Trump through the release of hacked Democratic emails, which provided fodder for many of the most pernicious false attacks on Mrs. Clinton on social media.

Some of those attacks found a home on Russian websites such as the one for Katehon, a right-wing Christian think tank aligned with Mr. Putin. Katehon recirculated anti-Clinton conspiracies under headlines like “Bloody Hillary: 5 Mysterious Murders Linked to Clinton.”

Another Russian site that urged support for Mr. Trump, called “Just Trump It,” is linked to the International Russian Conservative Forum, an annual gathering of far-right leaders in St. Petersburg that has featured Mr. Dowson, among others, as a speaker. The site, which seems mostly aimed at selling Trump T-shirts, was registered to an individual at a Russian company that trademarked a logo used to certify that merchandise was not made with migrant labor.

Some analysts see danger signs in the nexus of Russian interests and far-right agitators in Europe and the United States. Social media can amplify even the most obscure voices, giving them a stage from which to broadcast a distorted message to credulous audiences.

“These messages seep into the mainstream,” said Alina Polyakova, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, a nonpartisan international affairs institute in Washington. “They may have been extreme or fringe at one point in time, but they have been incredibly influential in shaping people’s views about key geopolitical events in a very specific direction.”

Russia is particularly adept at playing this game, Ms. Polyakova said. “Moscow specifically encourages and facilitates” the spreading of propaganda through proxies, she said, as well as through events like the Russian conservative forum, which showcases views and narratives favored by the Putin government.

At the inaugural forum in March 2015, Mr. Dowson praised Mr. Putin as a strong defender of traditional values, while belittling President Obama and the United States itself as “feminized men.” In the email interview, Mr. Dowson said he was not supported by Russia in any way, and he accused critics of trying to tar conservatives as dupes of Moscow.
Photo
Mr. Dowson spoke in 2015 at the International Russian Conservative Forum, a gathering of far-right leaders in St. Petersburg. Credit Ruslan Shamukov/TASS, via Newscom

“I look on this rebirth of McCarthy-type anti-Russian hysteria by the LEFT as a hilarious reaction born out of the left’s inability to realize THEY elected Trump, not me, not the Russians, not even the right,” he said via email.

A colorful if somewhat enigmatic figure in Britain — The Times of London recently described him as “the invisible man of Britain’s far right” — Mr. Dowson, at first blush, would not be an obvious mouthpiece for Russia.

Formerly a church minister in Northern Ireland and the father of nine, he became involved in anti-abortion campaigns, joined the British National Party in the mid-2000s and, later, founded Britain First, a stridently anti-immigrant group opposed to what it called a creeping Islamic threat to traditional British values. He publicly split with the group in 2014 after some of its leaders started invading mosques and threatening Muslims, which he criticized as un-Christian and counterproductive.

While involved with Britain First, Mr. Dowson made deft use of social media and websites to promote its work and convey the impression of a mass following. A British watchdog group called Hope Not Hate, which has tracked Mr. Dowson’s online activities, concluded that he has “a rather canny knack for building up protest groups and movements on the basis that it was your Christian duty to follow his work.”

Mr. Dowson claims to have reached millions of Americans across all of his online platforms in the run-up to the November presidential election, a number that could not be verified, in part, because he would not confirm all of his sites. Online visits to Patriot News did not come close to that, although when combined with several other sites that appear to be connected to Mr. Dowson, the total number edges above a million; most viewers were in Britain.
Got a confidential news tip?

The New York Times would like to hear from readers who want to share messages and materials with our journalists.

Whatever the precise numbers, there is little question that postings on the sites and Facebook pages linked to him were viewed and shared hundreds of thousands of times. Many of the postings appear to be lifted from other conspiracy websites, repackaged and launched back into the social media maelstrom. Another site that trafficked heavily in pro-Trump news was run by Knights Templar International, a militant religious group that Mr. Dowson is involved in, which has recently supported anti-immigrant militias patrolling border areas in Bulgaria and Hungary.

For Mr. Dowson, such activities are in keeping with his philosophy that traditional Christian values are under siege because of feckless leadership by America and European powers. The success of Mr. Trump, he said, is the logical result of voters’ rejection of the weakness of global elites.

Mr. Dowson has long been optimistic about the effectiveness of social media. During the 2015 conservative forum in Russia, he spoke presciently about the looming online battle for the attention of American voters.

“We have the ability to take a video from today and put it in half of every single household in the United States of America, where these people can for the first time learn the truth, because their own media tell lies, they tell lies about Russia,” Mr. Dowson said then.

“We have to use popular culture to reach into the living rooms of the youth of America, of Britain, France, Germany, and bring them in,” he said. “Then we can get them the message.”

Follow Mike McIntire on Twitter.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #671 on: December 19, 2016, 04:34:55 PM »

Let's review our Constitutional theory a bit:

We are NOT a democracy. We are a constitutional republic. Our Founding Fathers were quite clear and quite articulate about the dangers of simple democracy and quite purposeful in constructing something to protect us from them.

We are the UNITED STATES of America, with each state being sovereign in areas which have not been delegated to the Feds. This is the Tenth Amendment. Somewhat confusingly labelled, this is known as "Federalism" as in "Federation"-- as versus a "confederacy"-- which by the way is what we were before the Constitution was passed.

((Trivia: The phrase in the preamble of our Constitution "In order to form a more perfect union" is a reference to the union created by this confederacy. Very much worth noting is that the union was declared in the formation of the confederacy to be permanent. Proper statutory construction here incorporates this into our Constitution, thus deny the claims to the right to secession asserted by the Southern States in the Civil War, but I digress))

Thus, the electoral college can be analogized to the World Series. The winner is not determined by the net numbers of runs scored by each team, but by who wins four games first (or 270 electoral college votes).
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14260


« Reply #672 on: December 19, 2016, 08:00:41 PM »

Yes, it was the Russian's propaganda, not the wikileaks emails confirming the DNC-MSM collusion for all to see and Grannie Corruption McNeuropathology as a candidate that lost the election to Trump. Damn you, Putin!!  rolleyes


Obviously in that this is Pravda on the Hudson, caveat lector

How a Putin Fan Overseas Pushed Pro-Trump Propaganda to Americans

By MIKE McINTIREDEC. 17, 2016
Dowson, a far-right political activist, ran a constellation of websites out of the United Kingdom. Credit Rex Features, via Associated Press

The Patriot News Agency website popped up in July, soon after it became clear that Donald J. Trump would win the Republican presidential nomination, bearing a logo of a red, white and blue eagle and the motto “Built by patriots, for patriots.”

Tucked away on a corner of the site, next to links for Twitter and YouTube, is a link to another social media platform that most Americans have never heard of: VKontakte, the Russian equivalent of Facebook. It is a clue that Patriot News, like many sites that appeared out of nowhere and pumped out pro-Trump hoaxes tying his opponent Hillary Clinton to Satanism, pedophilia and other conspiracies, is actually run by foreigners based overseas.

But while most of those others seem be the work of young, apolitical opportunists cashing in on a conservative appetite for viral nonsense, operators of Patriot News had an explicitly partisan motivation: getting Mr. Trump elected.

Patriot News — whose postings were viewed and shared tens of thousands of times in the United States — is among a constellation of websites run out of the United Kingdom that are linked to James Dowson, a far-right political activist who advocated Britain’s exit from the European Union and is a fan of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia. A vocal proponent of Christian nationalist, anti-immigrant movements in Europe, Mr. Dowson, 52, has spoken at a conference of far-right leaders in Russia and makes no secret of his hope that Mr. Trump will usher in an era of rapprochement with Mr. Putin.

===================================
Recent Comments
Bill Casey 17 hours ago

My mother, who is 72 years old and grew up in a time when you could trust what you read, joined Facebook this year. She was hesitant to vote...
Boston Comments 19 hours ago

Gawd, I can barely grasp at words after reading this superb piece of reportage. I'm old enough to remember the McCarthy era -- and although...
J T 19 hours ago

Why am I not surprised this former "church minister in Northern Ireland," whose religious justifications for his actions are repeatedly...
=========================


His dabbling in the American presidential election adds an ideological element that has been largely missing from the still-emerging landscape of websites and Facebook pages that bombarded American voters with misinformation and propaganda. Far from the much-reported Macedonian teenagers running fake news factories solely for profit, Mr. Dowson made it his mission, according to messages posted on one of his sites, to “spread devastating anti-Clinton, pro-Trump memes and sound bites into sections of the population too disillusioned with politics to have taken any notice of conventional campaigning.”
Photo
An image from one of Mr. Dowson’s websites. He said his mission was to “spread devastating anti-Clinton, pro-Trump memes and sound bites.”

“Together, people like us helped change the course of history,” one message said, adding in another: “Every single one of you who forwarded even just one of our posts on social media contributed to the stunning victory for Trump, America and God.”

In a recent email interview from Belgrade, where he has met with Serbian nationalists, Mr. Dowson explained how his decision to establish an American social media presence was similar to the move into European markets by Breitbart News, the conservative provocateur media operation run by Stephen K. Bannon, Mr. Trump’s chief strategist.

“Simple truth is that after 40 years of the right having no voice because the media was owned by the enemy, we were FORCED to become incredibly good at alternative media in a way the left simply can’t grasp or handle,” Mr. Dowson said. “Bottom line is: BREXIT, TRUMP and much more to follow.”

While it is easy to overstate the influence of fringe elements whose overall numbers remain very small, the explosion of fake news and propaganda sites and their possible impact on the presidential election have ignited alarm across the American political spectrum. A recent study found that most people who read fabricated stories on Facebook — such as a widely circulated hoax about Pope Francis endorsing Mr. Trump — were inclined to believe them.

Then there is the added element of Russian meddling. The Central Intelligence Agency has concluded that Moscow put its thumb on the scale for Mr. Trump through the release of hacked Democratic emails, which provided fodder for many of the most pernicious false attacks on Mrs. Clinton on social media.

Some of those attacks found a home on Russian websites such as the one for Katehon, a right-wing Christian think tank aligned with Mr. Putin. Katehon recirculated anti-Clinton conspiracies under headlines like “Bloody Hillary: 5 Mysterious Murders Linked to Clinton.”

Another Russian site that urged support for Mr. Trump, called “Just Trump It,” is linked to the International Russian Conservative Forum, an annual gathering of far-right leaders in St. Petersburg that has featured Mr. Dowson, among others, as a speaker. The site, which seems mostly aimed at selling Trump T-shirts, was registered to an individual at a Russian company that trademarked a logo used to certify that merchandise was not made with migrant labor.

Some analysts see danger signs in the nexus of Russian interests and far-right agitators in Europe and the United States. Social media can amplify even the most obscure voices, giving them a stage from which to broadcast a distorted message to credulous audiences.

“These messages seep into the mainstream,” said Alina Polyakova, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, a nonpartisan international affairs institute in Washington. “They may have been extreme or fringe at one point in time, but they have been incredibly influential in shaping people’s views about key geopolitical events in a very specific direction.”

Russia is particularly adept at playing this game, Ms. Polyakova said. “Moscow specifically encourages and facilitates” the spreading of propaganda through proxies, she said, as well as through events like the Russian conservative forum, which showcases views and narratives favored by the Putin government.

At the inaugural forum in March 2015, Mr. Dowson praised Mr. Putin as a strong defender of traditional values, while belittling President Obama and the United States itself as “feminized men.” In the email interview, Mr. Dowson said he was not supported by Russia in any way, and he accused critics of trying to tar conservatives as dupes of Moscow.
Photo
Mr. Dowson spoke in 2015 at the International Russian Conservative Forum, a gathering of far-right leaders in St. Petersburg. Credit Ruslan Shamukov/TASS, via Newscom

“I look on this rebirth of McCarthy-type anti-Russian hysteria by the LEFT as a hilarious reaction born out of the left’s inability to realize THEY elected Trump, not me, not the Russians, not even the right,” he said via email.

A colorful if somewhat enigmatic figure in Britain — The Times of London recently described him as “the invisible man of Britain’s far right” — Mr. Dowson, at first blush, would not be an obvious mouthpiece for Russia.

Formerly a church minister in Northern Ireland and the father of nine, he became involved in anti-abortion campaigns, joined the British National Party in the mid-2000s and, later, founded Britain First, a stridently anti-immigrant group opposed to what it called a creeping Islamic threat to traditional British values. He publicly split with the group in 2014 after some of its leaders started invading mosques and threatening Muslims, which he criticized as un-Christian and counterproductive.

While involved with Britain First, Mr. Dowson made deft use of social media and websites to promote its work and convey the impression of a mass following. A British watchdog group called Hope Not Hate, which has tracked Mr. Dowson’s online activities, concluded that he has “a rather canny knack for building up protest groups and movements on the basis that it was your Christian duty to follow his work.”

Mr. Dowson claims to have reached millions of Americans across all of his online platforms in the run-up to the November presidential election, a number that could not be verified, in part, because he would not confirm all of his sites. Online visits to Patriot News did not come close to that, although when combined with several other sites that appear to be connected to Mr. Dowson, the total number edges above a million; most viewers were in Britain.
Got a confidential news tip?

The New York Times would like to hear from readers who want to share messages and materials with our journalists.

Whatever the precise numbers, there is little question that postings on the sites and Facebook pages linked to him were viewed and shared hundreds of thousands of times. Many of the postings appear to be lifted from other conspiracy websites, repackaged and launched back into the social media maelstrom. Another site that trafficked heavily in pro-Trump news was run by Knights Templar International, a militant religious group that Mr. Dowson is involved in, which has recently supported anti-immigrant militias patrolling border areas in Bulgaria and Hungary.

For Mr. Dowson, such activities are in keeping with his philosophy that traditional Christian values are under siege because of feckless leadership by America and European powers. The success of Mr. Trump, he said, is the logical result of voters’ rejection of the weakness of global elites.

Mr. Dowson has long been optimistic about the effectiveness of social media. During the 2015 conservative forum in Russia, he spoke presciently about the looming online battle for the attention of American voters.

“We have the ability to take a video from today and put it in half of every single household in the United States of America, where these people can for the first time learn the truth, because their own media tell lies, they tell lies about Russia,” Mr. Dowson said then.

“We have to use popular culture to reach into the living rooms of the youth of America, of Britain, France, Germany, and bring them in,” he said. “Then we can get them the message.”

Follow Mike McIntire on Twitter.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #673 on: December 19, 2016, 10:59:35 PM »

All true, but I'd like to suggest that we here need to keep our eye on the elephant in the room.  

It seems likely the Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians, and maybe the Norks have penetrated our water, electric, transport grids to greater or lesser extents, and to extents unknown have penetrated our government.  

Now the Russkis, using techniques they (including the KGB) have honed for decades, are now cyber-penetrating our domestic conversation and are spreading plausible sounding lies to their purpose.  They are now confident enough to have brought this to bear on our electoral process itself.  

No, it did not change the results THIS time, but it certainly plants the seeds for doubt NEXT time which will be turbocharged by the fact many Americans wonder about how close our new president envisions us working in alliance with them.

This is serious excrement, but even this is not complete.  We are being cyber-penetrated in our elections, our government, our grids, our technology, and our private lives (think the Chinese snatch of the security clearance applications of millions of American government workers!) and more!  The wall along the border with Mexico is challenge enough; is there a wall that can be built for this?

edited
« Last Edit: December 19, 2016, 11:42:33 PM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14260


« Reply #674 on: December 19, 2016, 11:04:46 PM »

If you are worried about enemies of the US gaining access to political power in the US, I would refer you to the last 8 years.



All true, but I'd like to suggest that we here need to keep our eye on the elephant in the room. 

It seems likely the Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians, and maybe the Norks have penetrated our water, electric, transport grids to greater or lesser extents, and to extents unknown have penetrated our government. 

Now the Russkis, using techniques they (including the KGB) have honed for decades, are now cyber-penetrating our domestic conversation and are spreading plausible sounding lies to their purpose.  They are now confident enough to have brought this to bear on our electoral process itself. 

No, it did not change the results THIS time, but it certainly plants the seeds for doubt NEXT time which will be turbocharged by the fact many Americans wonder about how close our new president envisions us working in alliance with them.

This is serious excrement.


Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #675 on: December 19, 2016, 11:24:36 PM »

Sorry, but as true as that rejoinder is, it still misses the bigger point.  We are being penetrated. In a new and fundamental way.  What are we going to do about it?
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14260


« Reply #676 on: December 19, 2016, 11:39:20 PM »

Sorry, but as true as that rejoinder is, it still misses the bigger point.  We are being penetrated. In a new and fundamental way.  What are we going to do about it?


What will we do and what should we do are two separate questions. We should take cyberwar very seriously. But, we won't. Then, when a state or non-state actor toasts the grid, then sh@t will get real.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #677 on: December 20, 2016, 12:44:02 PM »

We need to know the arguments-- e.g. the slave holder argument and how to counter it.
===========================

By overwhelming majorities, Americans would prefer to elect the president by direct popular vote, not filtered through the antiquated mechanism of the Electoral College. They understand, on a gut level, the basic fairness of awarding the nation’s highest office on the same basis as every other elected office — to the person who gets the most votes.

But for now, the presidency is still decided by 538 electors. And on Monday, despite much talk in recent weeks about urging those electors to block Donald Trump from the White House, a majority did as expected and cast their ballots for him — a result Congress will ratify next month.

And so for the second time in 16 years, the candidate who lost the popular vote has won the presidency. Unlike 2000, it wasn’t even close. Hillary Clinton beat Mr. Trump by more than 2.8 million votes, or 2.1 percent of the electorate. That’s a wider margin than 10 winning candidates enjoyed and the biggest deficit for an incoming president since the 19th century.

Yes, Mr. Trump won under the rules, but the rules should change so that a presidential election reflects the will of Americans and promotes a more participatory democracy.
Sign Up for the Opinion Today Newsletter

Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, the Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.
Receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.

    See Sample Manage Email Preferences Privacy Policy

The Electoral College, which is written into the Constitution, is more than just a vestige of the founding era; it is a living symbol of America’s original sin. When slavery was the law of the land, a direct popular vote would have disadvantaged the Southern states, with their large disenfranchised populations. Counting those men and women as three-fifths of a white person, as the Constitution originally did, gave the slave states more electoral votes.

Today the college, which allocates electors based on each state’s representation in Congress, tips the scales in favor of smaller states; a Wyoming resident’s vote counts 3.6 times as much as a Californian’s. And because almost all states use a winner-take-all system, the election ends up being fought in just a dozen or so “battleground” states, leaving tens of millions of Americans on the sidelines.

There is an elegant solution: The Constitution establishes the existence of electors, but leaves it up to states to tell them how to vote. Eleven states and the District of Columbia, representing 165 electoral votes, have already passed legislation to have their electors vote for the winner of the national popular vote. The agreement, known as the National Popular Vote interstate compact, would take effect once states representing a majority of electoral votes, currently 270, signed on. This would ensure that the national popular-vote winner would become president.

Conservative opponents of a direct vote say it would give an unfair edge to large, heavily Democratic cities and states. But why should the votes of Americans in California or New York count for less than those in Idaho or Texas? A direct popular vote would treat all Americans equally, no matter where they live — including, by the way, Republicans in San Francisco and Democrats in Corpus Christi, whose votes are currently worthless. The system as it now operates does a terrible job of representing the nation’s demographic and geographic diversity. Almost 138 million Americans went to the polls this year, but Mr. Trump secured his Electoral College victory thanks to fewer than 80,000 votes across three states: Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

This page opposed the Electoral College in 1936, and in more recent years as well. In 2004, President George W. Bush won the popular vote by more than three million, but he could have lost the Electoral College with a switch of fewer than 60,000 votes in Ohio.

Many Republicans have endorsed doing away with the Electoral College, including Mr. Trump himself, in 2012. Maybe that’s why he keeps claiming falsely that he won the popular vote, or why more than half of Republicans now seem to believe he did. For most reasonable people, it’s hard to understand why the loser of the popular vote should wind up running the country.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #678 on: December 20, 2016, 05:17:26 PM »

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2016/12/18/detroit-ballots-vote-recount-election-stein/95570866/
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14260


« Reply #679 on: December 20, 2016, 07:26:29 PM »


Strange. I'm sure an investigation of other democrat dominated cities would show that this is just an isolated incident, and not indicative of a larger trend.

We'd better check, just to be sure.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38673


« Reply #680 on: December 20, 2016, 07:44:32 PM »

Snarkmaster!  cheesy
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14260


« Reply #681 on: December 21, 2016, 09:52:10 AM »

We need to know the arguments-- e.g. the slave holder argument and how to counter it.
===========================

By overwhelming majorities, Americans would prefer to elect the president by direct popular vote, not filtered through the antiquated mechanism of the Electoral College. They understand, on a gut level, the basic fairness of awarding the nation’s highest office on the same basis as every other elected office — to the person who gets the most votes.

But for now, the presidency is still decided by 538 electors. And on Monday, despite much talk in recent weeks about urging those electors to block Donald Trump from the White House, a majority did as expected and cast their ballots for him — a result Congress will ratify next month.

And so for the second time in 16 years, the candidate who lost the popular vote has won the presidency. Unlike 2000, it wasn’t even close. Hillary Clinton beat Mr. Trump by more than 2.8 million votes, or 2.1 percent of the electorate. That’s a wider margin than 10 winning candidates enjoyed and the biggest deficit for an incoming president since the 19th century.

Yes, Mr. Trump won under the rules, but the rules should change so that a presidential election reflects the will of Americans and promotes a more participatory democracy.
Sign Up for the Opinion Today Newsletter

Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, the Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.
Receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.

    See Sample Manage Email Preferences Privacy Policy

The Electoral College, which is written into the Constitution, is more than just a vestige of the founding era; it is a living symbol of America’s original sin. When slavery was the law of the land, a direct popular vote would have disadvantaged the Southern states, with their large disenfranchised populations. Counting those men and women as three-fifths of a white person, as the Constitution originally did, gave the slave states more electoral votes.

Today the college, which allocates electors based on each state’s representation in Congress, tips the scales in favor of smaller states; a Wyoming resident’s vote counts 3.6 times as much as a Californian’s. And because almost all states use a winner-take-all system, the election ends up being fought in just a dozen or so “battleground” states, leaving tens of millions of Americans on the sidelines.

There is an elegant solution: The Constitution establishes the existence of electors, but leaves it up to states to tell them how to vote. Eleven states and the District of Columbia, representing 165 electoral votes, have already passed legislation to have their electors vote for the winner of the national popular vote. The agreement, known as the National Popular Vote interstate compact, would take effect once states representing a majority of electoral votes, currently 270, signed on. This would ensure that the national popular-vote winner would become president.

Conservative opponents of a direct vote say it would give an unfair edge to large, heavily Democratic cities and states. But why should the votes of Americans in California or New York count for less than those in Idaho or Texas? A direct popular vote would treat all Americans equally, no matter where they live — including, by the way, Republicans in San Francisco and Democrats in Corpus Christi, whose votes are currently worthless. The system as it now operates does a terrible job of representing the nation’s demographic and geographic diversity. Almost 138 million Americans went to the polls this year, but Mr. Trump secured his Electoral College victory thanks to fewer than 80,000 votes across three states: Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

This page opposed the Electoral College in 1936, and in more recent years as well. In 2004, President George W. Bush won the popular vote by more than three million, but he could have lost the Electoral College with a switch of fewer than 60,000 votes in Ohio.

Many Republicans have endorsed doing away with the Electoral College, including Mr. Trump himself, in 2012. Maybe that’s why he keeps claiming falsely that he won the popular vote, or why more than half of Republicans now seem to believe he did. For most reasonable people, it’s hard to understand why the loser of the popular vote should wind up running the country.



http://www.michaelpramirez.com/uploads/3/4/9/8/34985326/mrz111916-color_orig.jpg
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #682 on: December 21, 2016, 10:27:04 AM »

The Democrat Party cannot win on ideas with people here legally.  So just open up the borders to the world and viola.  They have millions more votes.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8490


« Reply #683 on: December 21, 2016, 11:30:53 AM »

"We need to know the arguments [against the electoral college] -- e.g. the slave holder argument and how to counter it."

And likewise, the people should be taught the reasons FOR the electoral college.  Three places you're not likely to learn them, the mainstream media, the public schools and liberal-run private schools.  In other words, you might have to visit the right wing blogosphere, or this forum!


"The Electoral College ... is a living symbol of America’s original sin. When slavery was the law of the land, a direct popular vote would have disadvantaged the Southern states, with their large disenfranchised populations. Counting those men and women as three-fifths of a white person, as the Constitution originally did, gave the slave states more electoral votes."


Oh good grief!  Does the NY Times know math any better than that?  How does adding two Senators to the House total for ALL states give you the southern slave count?  If slave compensation was the reason, the math would count a slave as one person or multiply the slave number by 5/3rds.  The biggest colony, Virginia, was a slave state and some of the smallest, Rhode Island Delaware for example, were not.   https://web.viu.ca/davies/h320/population.colonies.htm  
Slavery was not the central point of the constitution, contrary to what is taught in our schools and newspapers.

There were good reasons then and there are good reasons now for the electoral college and as far as I know, they are the same.  Before delving into them, I would ask opponents what other parts of the constitution don't you like?  Article 5 perhaps, amending the constitution?  Note that their elegant solution goes around amending the constitution.  We hear polling on the popularity of the electoral college of randomly or systematically chosen Americans without hearing whether a majority favor abandoning it - in 3/4ths of the state legislatures, the vote that matters!  How does the electoral polling look in the 38 smallest states?  I wonder how Iowa and New Hampshire feel?  And Wyoming, Alaska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Idaho, West Virginia, Nevada, Mississippi, Utah, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Alabama, Indiana.  Do they want to be ruled by California?  I don't.  It only takes 13 states opposed to defeat repeal of the constitutional electoral college - if constitutional process mattered.

What do we say about liberals who were enthralled with the electoral college as recently as Nov. 6?  Did anyone hear about the big Blue Wall?  Hillary or any Democrat has 242 electoral votes before the vote count begins:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_wall_(politics)  
States falling behind this blue wall generally included those the Democrats had carried since the 1992 presidential election,[5][6] and included (in order of decreasing population and followed by number of electoral votes): California (55), New York (29), Illinois (20), New Jersey (14), Washington (12), Massachusetts (11), Maryland (10), Minnesota (10), Oregon (7), Connecticut (7), Hawaii (4), Maine (4), Rhode Island (4), Delaware (3), and Vermont (3).  That Donald Trump had a narrow path to victory, narrow path to victory, narrow path to victory, narrow path to victory,  http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-path-to-victory-is-narrow-1478480114   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ7lYRnF1F8

Reasons to keep the electoral college:

1. Requires the winning candidate to have significant trans-regional appeal.  

2. The entire constitution is a protection against tyranny by the majority.  Without it we could just have a popular vote on everything.

3. Certainty if outcome.  Challenges and recounts tend to be limited to a limited number of states, rarely wffecting the outcome.

4. Avoidance of a runoff.  Liberals can say Hillary won the popular vote in an electoral vote contest, but by no count did she win 50% plus one vote as the constitution also requires.  Hillary Clinton received 48% of the popular vote.  So then this goes to the Republican majority House of Representatives or do we change that rule too when it hurts Democrats?  Eliminate that rule and then even more minor party candidates run as spoilers and power brokers instead of the current system that mostly forces two major parties to reach to the middle.  Or should we have purality elections with run-off caused by the Gary Johnsons, Jill Steins and Ralph Naders of the spectrum?  In a runoff election without Ross Perot and more time to consider the consequences while the economy was already coming out of a recession, would incumbent President George H.W. Bush have lost to the Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton, who never did get 50% of the vote?  Maybe, maybe not.

5. Swing States.  The nature of the swing state contest is to force both major candidates toward the middle and toward being seen as more reasonable by the middle view of the country in a range of regions and states, from Nevada to New Hampshire in this most recent case.  Neither side can just throw out red meat to their side and win, in theory.

6.  Big states still have big clout.  California at 55 votes, still has more than one fifth of what is needed to win.

7.  The argument against the electoral college works as an argument against having the Senate, also not proportionally representative.  It is an argument against the House too.  Why are House districts winner take all instead of proportional representation?  Why not abandon Article 1 while were at it, and maybe all of the constitution.  Why protect rights or limit government if majority rule is better by definition?

8. If the first 7 don't persuade you, please consider that the Founding Fathers were much smarter and wiser than you - even if you call yourself "All the News That's Fit to Print”.  A constitution-less country would not have survived this long or prospered this well.  These protections have served their purpose well and the constitution has been sufficiently amendable when needed, proven 27 times over.  Who really believes otherwise?
« Last Edit: December 22, 2016, 07:11:31 AM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6570


« Reply #684 on: December 21, 2016, 12:01:28 PM »

Good points Doug.

Additional new re writing of history through the eyes of those who today make EVERYTHING racist.
Now the electoral college is an invention by evil white privileged men to keep the Black man down.

How can there be compromise with this stuff?  There simply is not compromise with these people .  None.  The angry racialists have merged with the globalists to seize power in the USA for them and around the world for the elite globalists as I see it.

We can only hope that through Trump's success in among America stronger and more thriving that enough of those in the middle will wake up and help us control (defeat is never going to happen) the liberal onslaught .  We have to keep giving the chemo to keep down the cancer.

I don't see any other way around this.  Unfortunately we are divided less by geography then during the original civil war.

Yesterday I picked up my monthly National Geographic to find the entire issue is about leftist gender political dogma.  I just renewed my subscription too!  I notice another one of my mag subscriptions to Smithsonian is also increasingly packed with liberal dogma. 
For God's sake I can't even read these magazines without being barraged with white man privilege hatred!

Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8490


« Reply #685 on: December 21, 2016, 10:59:49 PM »

Some similar points here:

http://theweek.com/articles/668508/electoral-college-actually-awesome
The Electoral College is actually awesome

Edward Morrissey
December 21, 2016

...The Times' editorial also highlighted the supposed unfairness of not "using the same basis as every other elected office." The reason for this is that the presidency is not at all "like every other national office" — and it never has been.

Unlike governors, whose state governments have total sovereignty within their borders, the presidency governs over states with their own sovereignty under the Constitution. The role of the presidency is at least somewhat limited to foreign policy and questions that are at least loosely connected to interstate issues and enforcement of other provisions of the Constitution. For that reason, the framers of the Constitution wanted to ensure that the president would have the greatest consensus among the sovereign states themselves, while still including representation based on population.

That is why each state gets the same number of electors as they have seats in the House and the Senate. It reduces the advantage that larger states have, but hardly eliminates it entirely; California has 55 electors while Wyoming has only three, to use the Times' comparison. Rather than being an "antiquated system," as they write, it's an elegant system that helps balance power between sovereign states with national popular intent, and it forces presidential contenders to appeal to a broader range of populations.

The editorial points out that Republican votes in San Francisco are "worthless" under the current system. But that has more to do with the way the states choose to allocate electors than it does the Electoral College. California and 47 other states allocate electors on a winner-take-all basis, which gives their states much more power in presidential elections. States could choose other allocation schemes if they want to prioritize "democracy" and proportional representation over influence, but none of the high-population states do so.

In this case, the nature of the popular-vote lead is instructive on why smaller states won't go along with the Times' demand to end the Electoral College. Clinton won the overall popular vote by nearly 3 million, but won California by 4.3 million and New York by 1.7 million. Donald Trump won 30 of the 50 states. Relying on the popular vote would have voters in the largest states determine the outcome and lock out the majority of the states, as it would have in 2016.

A popular-vote system would change the entire dynamic of presidential campaigns. Rather than spending time in states with smaller populations, candidates would spend their time trying to fight it out in the most populous locations. That might be good news for California, New York, and Texas, but it's bad news for most of the South and Midwest. Had a popular-vote system been in place in 2016, the Trump campaign would have oriented itself toward it and might have competed more in coastal Democratic strongholds, wasting less effort in other states.

Instead, the Electoral College system worked exactly as intended. The candidate who built the best consensus among the states through their popular votes won the presidency. The problem for the Times and others opposed to the outcome is that their candidate didn't beat the winner.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2016, 07:09:52 AM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8490


« Reply #686 on: December 22, 2016, 07:53:09 PM »

NYT:  "This page opposed the Electoral College in 1936, and in more recent years as well."

Whoops.  They were against it, before they were for it, before they were against it:

NYT Correction: December 20, 2016
An earlier version of this editorial incorrectly stated that the editorial board has been opposed to the Electoral College going back 80 years. It failed to note an exception: in 2000, the board defended the college after the election of George W. Bush.

The 2000 editorial was titled, “The Case for the Electoral College” and the editors argued that, “The Electoral College was first and foremost a compact among states, large and small, designed to ensure that one state or one region did not dominate the others.”  [Isn't that about what I said?]   )

The Times ended the editorial with:
The system has survived earlier instances in which the winner of the popular vote was denied the presidency. Wise voters and legislators will want to make sure that it survives this one as well.

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/12/19/opinion/the-case-for-the-electoral-college.html

Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8490


« Reply #687 on: December 28, 2016, 10:39:49 PM »

Stick this in the NYT editorial pipe and smoke it.   )

it was the electoral college that made it possible to end slavery, since Abraham Lincoln earned only 39 percent of the popular vote in the election of 1860, but won a crushing victory in the electoral college.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/11/15/in-defense-of-the-electoral-college/?utm_term=.195822a37f30
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!