Posted by MikeT23 on 3/17/2017 3:40:00 PM (view original):
Yet a lower percentage came out to vote for Obama(2012) and Dubya(2000) than the Hillary/Trump debacle.

A lot of people stayed home in those elections too.

A lower percentage of what?

Oh, we're down to the "Act dumb so people will repeat themselves" BL.

% of American voters. I don't recall the exact numbers but it was over 58% in '08, about 52% in '00, 55% in '16 and 54% in '12.

Why were people staying home in '00 and '12(when your buddy Obama was on the ballot)?

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/17/2017 3:57:00 PM (view original):
Oh, we're down to the "Act dumb so people will repeat themselves" BL.

% of American voters. I don't recall the exact numbers but it was over 58% in '08, about 52% in '00, 55% in '16 and 54% in '12.

Why were people staying home in '00 and '12(when your buddy Obama was on the ballot)?

I'm not acting dumb. You are being vague. Percentage of what? Registered voters? Eligible voters? All of voting age? All US citizens?

So you're just dumb? OK, fine by me.

All of voting age.

I don't know why you get so butthurt by me asking for clarification. I think you'd also be butthurt if I had assumed you were talking about registered voters and started the discussion there.

I'm not sure exactly what your point is. Yeah, according to http://www.electproject.org/home/voter-turnout the turnout of all voting age population in 2016 was 54.7%. It was 53.6% in 2012 and 56.9% in 2008.

I wouldn't draw much of a conclusion about the 2012 number, at least not as it relates to Obama, considering he received more 3 million more votes in 2012 than Trump did in 2016.

who cares? Obama was not running against Trump. Hillary Clinton was, and it was very hard for me to vote for her. She is one of my least favorite politicians (not that I have any favorite ones), but Trump scared me (and still does.)

Posted by bad_luck on 3/17/2017 1:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 3/17/2017 1:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 3/16/2017 7:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 3/16/2017 7:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by crazystengel on 3/16/2017 6:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 3/16/2017 6:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by crazystengel on 3/16/2017 4:19:00 PM (view original):
I don't get why Mike pretends to be ignorant. Weird shtick he's got going on here, but there's no point in debating someone like that. At least todd's not pretending.

Hey, waitaminnit...

Consider it a compliment -- you're sincere! I respect that. As opposed to a troll taking positions he knows are BS just to get reactions.

ICYMI, I didn't vote for Trump either. But I also think that the blatant media liberal slant help get him elected. A lot of non-BL/Bracco people (whether because they're well-informed or just pig-headed) don't like it when traditionally impartial sources overtly take political positions, and skew their "news" toward attack pieces.

BL calls it "journalism"

Trump didn't win because the media slants liberal. Trump won because 1) there are plenty of morons voting and 2) a lot of people on the left stayed home.

This election wasn't some sort of statement about American values or being fed up with the establishment, it was apathy. Enough people shrugged their shoulders on election day that the guy who lost the popular vote by several million was able to squeak by on a slim margin in a few states and land in the very famous White House.

You need to take your head out of the sand.

Trump was a horrible candidate. But the primary reason why he won was because the Democratic Party ran a near equally horrible candidate against him, somebody who the public did not like and did not trust. Somebody who was perceived as being in the pockets of Wall Street, Somebody who was perceived as one who felt entitled to become Madame President because of who she was.

If you and the Democratic Party leadership continue to fail to acknowledge this, then you've learned absolutely nothing from this past election. Nothing.

See where I wrote: a lot of people on the left stayed home?

Yeah, Clinton was an unpopular candidate who ran a bad campaign. No one denies that.

The irony in the perception of her as an untrustworthy, corrupt, Wall St. shill...is that is exactly what we got with Trump. With the added bonus of incompetence.

To quote Yoda... "That. Is. Why. You. Fail..."

To also quote Tec (maybe the first time he's been quoted with Yoda) : "You've learned absolutely nothing from this past election. Nothing"

Posted by bad_luck on 3/17/2017 4:25:00 PM (view original):
I don't know why you get so butthurt by me asking for clarification. I think you'd also be butthurt if I had assumed you were talking about registered voters and started the discussion there.

I'm not sure exactly what your point is. Yeah, according to http://www.electproject.org/home/voter-turnout the turnout of all voting age population in 2016 was 54.7%. It was 53.6% in 2012 and 56.9% in 2008.

I wouldn't draw much of a conclusion about the 2012 number, at least not as it relates to Obama, considering he received more 3 million more votes in 2012 than Trump did in 2016.

It's not butthurt to assume you know the turnout percentage is ALWAYS voting age population. I guess you didn't.

Nonetheless, 2000 and 2012 had a higher percentage of people who "stayed home".

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/17/2017 7:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 3/17/2017 4:25:00 PM (view original):
I don't know why you get so butthurt by me asking for clarification. I think you'd also be butthurt if I had assumed you were talking about registered voters and started the discussion there.

I'm not sure exactly what your point is. Yeah, according to http://www.electproject.org/home/voter-turnout the turnout of all voting age population in 2016 was 54.7%. It was 53.6% in 2012 and 56.9% in 2008.

I wouldn't draw much of a conclusion about the 2012 number, at least not as it relates to Obama, considering he received more 3 million more votes in 2012 than Trump did in 2016.

It's not butthurt to assume you know the turnout percentage is ALWAYS voting age population. I guess you didn't.

Nonetheless, 2000 and 2012 had a higher percentage of people who "stayed home".

No it isn't. Percentage of registered voters and percentage of eligible voters also gets used.

Still not sure what your point is regarding the amount of people that stayed home. I'm not concerned with the total turnout. I'm concerned with the segment of the voting population that voted for Obama twice and would vote Democrat in a given year, that didn't vote for Clinton.

They didn't like her. NOBODY liked her. Some just preferred her style of megalomania more than Trump's.

You've repeated, for 4+ months, "people stayed home". Happens in every election. 45% of the "people stay home." It wasn't some strange phenomenon. She lost because she was a terrible candidate. .

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/17/2017 7:35:00 PM (view original):
You've repeated, for 4+ months, "people stayed home". Happens in every election. 45% of the "people stay home." It wasn't some strange phenomenon. She lost because she was a terrible candidate. .

I don't disagree with any of that. My point remains, Trump didn't win because of some sort of populist movement, he won because Clinton didn't turn out Dems like Obama did.

Do you think Trump rallied the Repubs? I don't. Yet a higher percentage voted than in '00 and '12.

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/17/2017 7:46:00 PM (view original):
Do you think Trump rallied the Repubs? I don't. Yet a higher percentage voted than in '00 and '12.

He definitely didn't, as evidenced by the fact that he lost the popular vote. A lot of people voted third party.

All that matters is that Trump won. Mandate or not Trump will treat his presidency the same if he had a mandate, the same as every other president before him.

Btw vote coming up on Trumpcare this Thursday!!!!!