Latest post of the previous page:
Glad to hear Comey has "discovered" they have nothing to indict Hillary on. I doubt he will keep his job should Clinton win. Nasty business.INFORMATION
This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used.
For further information, see our Privacy Policy.
Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.
We are not accepting any new registrations.
This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used.
For further information, see our Privacy Policy.
Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.
We are not accepting any new registrations.
2016 US election
Re: 2016 US election
This is one of the great social functions of science - to free people of superstition. - Steven Weinberg
Re: 2016 US election
Is that because the pubs are so bad? Or so good........?Ken H wrote: Don't know if I could survive the the climate in Canada or the pubs in England...
Re: 2016 US election
how about illegally emigrating to Mexico? Nice and warmKen H wrote:So, I'll either be staying put or moving to Canada or the UK, depending on the outcome. Don't know if I could survive the the climate in Canada or the pubs in England...
Re: 2016 US election
@Nick: The beer is good!
@animist: Nice idea, but their cerveza is not as good.
@animist: Nice idea, but their cerveza is not as good.
This is one of the great social functions of science - to free people of superstition. - Steven Weinberg
Re: 2016 US election
whatever you call it, Ken, I figure you will be needing a few today! But Sam Harris thinks that Trump is an atheist, so the news can't be all badKen H wrote:@Nick: The beer is good!
@animist: Nice idea, but their cerveza is not as good.
Re: 2016 US election
What the fuck just happened?
Alan Henness
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
Re: 2016 US election
"The election was rigged" ?Alan H wrote:What the fuck just happened?
The Russians hacked the system?
God?
Aliens?
Dumb voters?
The electoral system? (Hillary got more votes.)
This is one of the great social functions of science - to free people of superstition. - Steven Weinberg
Re: 2016 US election
but there still states to declare, aren't there?Ken H wrote:(Hillary got more votes.)
True, probably emboldened by the victory of dumb voters over hereKen H wrote:Dumb voters?
Re: 2016 US election
Now all of the USA is farting on the rest of the world !jaywhat wrote:Another View
trump = break wind
Re: 2016 US election
He may be right. Trump has changed his church affiliation a few times over the years. However, he won the evangelical voters by making them think he was religious and saying he opposed abortion. He has also promised to "put more people in church."!animist wrote:whatever you call it, Ken, I figure you will be needing a few today! But Sam Harris thinks that Trump is an atheist, so the news can't be all badKen H wrote:@Nick: The beer is good!
@animist: Nice idea, but their cerveza is not as good.
I have never seen riots like this after an election: http://www.baynews9.com/content/news/ba ... nwide.html
This is one of the great social functions of science - to free people of superstition. - Steven Weinberg
Re: 2016 US election
I am somewhat surprised that the participation rate in the US Presidential election was so low, (IIRC) at 53%. Should I be?
Re: 2016 US election
It has been running as high as 64% in recent years. I think voters were disgusted with both candidates this year. Despite early voting and mail-in ballots, many people just don't bother with voting or learning about politics, especially lower income earners and young people. They would rather spend their time on social media. Republicans have been trying to make registering and voting harder with various laws.Nick wrote:I am somewhat surprised that the participation rate in the US Presidential election was so low, (IIRC) at 53%. Should I be?
This is one of the great social functions of science - to free people of superstition. - Steven Weinberg
Re: 2016 US election
Thanks, Ken, that is much as I thought. Do you think the Republicans have succeeded in restricting voters in any significant numbers?
I hear what you say about disgust on both sides, but on this side of the Pond, most are incredulous that The Donald has got anywhere near the White House. I don't think I'm alone in fondly imagining that that would encourage more voters to make the effort. I was wrong!
I am also wondering if the low turn-out reflects the fact that nominations to the electoral college (if I've got my terms right) are based on states backing their chosen candidate with all their votes, not a proportion according to votes cast. Unless you are in a swing state that must rather reduce the incentive to vote.... Hmmm.... I wonder if that is borne out in the stats...?
I hear what you say about disgust on both sides, but on this side of the Pond, most are incredulous that The Donald has got anywhere near the White House. I don't think I'm alone in fondly imagining that that would encourage more voters to make the effort. I was wrong!
I am also wondering if the low turn-out reflects the fact that nominations to the electoral college (if I've got my terms right) are based on states backing their chosen candidate with all their votes, not a proportion according to votes cast. Unless you are in a swing state that must rather reduce the incentive to vote.... Hmmm.... I wonder if that is borne out in the stats...?
Re: 2016 US election
I believe they have stopped a few from registering or voting, although the government has overturned the most blatant attempts.Nick wrote:Thanks, Ken, that is much as I thought. Do you think the Republicans have succeeded in restricting voters in any significant numbers?
I think that Trump voters were more enthusiastic than Hillary's, and they came out in greater force. Yeehaw!Nick wrote:I hear what you say about disgust on both sides, but on this side of the Pond, most are incredulous that The Donald has got anywhere near the White House. I don't think I'm alone in fondly imagining that that would encourage more voters to make the effort. I was wrong!
I don't think it makes much difference to the average voter. I do think the electoral college system has long since passed its usefulness and should be abandoned.Nick wrote:I am also wondering if the low turn-out reflects the fact that nominations to the electoral college (if I've got my terms right) are based on states backing their chosen candidate with all their votes, not a proportion according to votes cast. Unless you are in a swing state that must rather reduce the incentive to vote.... Hmmm.... I wonder if that is borne out in the stats...?
It's hard to comprehend the whole Trump thing. Perhaps mass hysteria is the only thing that comes close!
This is one of the great social functions of science - to free people of superstition. - Steven Weinberg
Re: 2016 US election
I see, from reading the WIki article on Hillary, that in 2000 she campaigned for abolition of the College in favour of direct election of the President - how she must be regretting that nothing came of this! As the US (unlike Britain) has quite separate elections for the executive and legislative branches of government, it surely should be feasible to change to a much simpler system - which would be akin to a referendum but with more than two choicesKen H wrote: I do think the electoral college system has long since passed its usefulness and should be abandoned.
Re: 2016 US election
https://secure.avaaz.org/campaign/en/pr ... c/?wngjMcbDear Trump
The unimaginable has happened. President Trump. Add your voice to the open letter below to make it a manifesto for the next 4 years — then spread it far and wide:
----
Dear Mr. Trump,
This is not what greatness looks like.
The world rejects your fear, hate-mongering, and bigotry. We reject your support for torture, your calls for murdering civilians, and your general encouragement of violence. We reject your denigration of women, Muslims, Mexicans, and millions of others who don’t look like you, talk like you, or pray to the same god as you.
Facing your fear we choose compassion. Hearing your despair we choose hope. Seeing your ignorance we choose understanding.
As citizens of the world, we stand united against your brand of division.
Sincerely,
[Add your name!]
Alan Henness
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
Re: 2016 US election
From a local paper. These people he wants to deport are undocumented immigrants. Just think about that for a few seconds - longer than that idiot will have done.
Alan Henness
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
Re: 2016 US election
You need to be in the US or have US VPN access, but well worth watching:
A short extract is here: John Oliver on Trump: 'A Klan-backed misogynist internet troll' is presiden
A short extract is here: John Oliver on Trump: 'A Klan-backed misogynist internet troll' is presiden
Alan Henness
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
Re: 2016 US election
Alan Henness
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
Re: 2016 US election
Or maybe he didn't. Or hasn't yet... Trump didn't request top secret clearance for his kids: officialAlan H wrote:What could possibly go wrong?
Donald Trump seeking 'top-secret security clearances for children'
Alan Henness
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
Re: 2016 US election
Alan Henness
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?