My prediction

[Bob Juch]

Predictions are hard, especially about the future.

Who had, "Trump will increase his lead over Hillary" in the pool?

Trump has only 268 but I don't think the Texas Electors will revolt.

[flockofseagulls104]

You do realize that the Democratic candidate for President has won the popular vote in 6 of the last 7 Presidential elections, including the one just concluded?

Most of the country's voters wanted Hillary Clinton to be our next President. Most of the country's voters wanted Democrats representing them in the House and in the Senate. Most of the country voted for the current incumbent, who was blocked by a naked power grab from exercising his constitutional perogative to appoint a Justice to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court. What we have here is nothing less than a minority takeover of the entire federal government.

I expect my Senators and Representative to give the Republicans every bit as much cooperation as the Republicans gave the current incumbent. And now that my firm has committed a substantial block of pro bono time for this purpose, I expect to use my professional talents to use all the tools the law affords those of us in the majority to protect our interests. --Bob

The popular vote is not how the President is elected. California, and in particular, LA and SF, is the only reason Clinton got more popular votes. And I for one don't want to be governed by California. That is exactly the reason the founders established the Electoral College.

Congress also has a Constitutional perogative. And it was reinforced by President Obama's precedent of ignoring the enforcement of laws passed by Congress.

Our votes are worth just as much as yours. And it's flatly false to say that we are the only reason she won the popular vote. Secretary Clinton won tens of millions of votes throughout the country.

This is a minority government that fully intends to impose its will on a majority that opposes it. It's my patriotic duty to oppose their efforts with every tool at my disposal. I'll be doing so. --Bob

Bob, there was a popular election in each of the 50 states plus the District of Columbia. Hillary won the popular vote in 20 states and DC. Trump won in 30 states. Quit crying. You are smart enough to know that a pure democracy is one of the worst and oppressive forms of government. So were the Founding Fathers. That's why they didn't establish a pure democracy. You want to devolve the US into a tyranny of the majority because your candidate lost? Yes, you got more hits than our team, but we won because we got more runs across the plate. Them's the rules. The more your side whines, the deeper you dig your hole. You are NOT a majority. Your side is a loud, obnoxious and bullying minority [that is concentrated in a few densely populated areas that do not reflect the views of the rest of the country]. Democratic seats in the Congress and nationwide are at lows not seen since Reconstruction. Get over it.

[Bob Juch]

Predictions are hard, especially about the future.

Who had, "Trump will increase his lead over Hillary" in the pool?

Trump has only 268 but I don't think the Texas Electors will revolt.

Two Texas electors didn't vote for Trump! One elector, Dallas's Christopher Suprun, had already declared his intent to vote for Ohio Republican Gov. John Kasich, who briefly emerged as a compromise pick for anti-Trump electors before rejecting their support. Suprun followed through on that pledge. But a second elector chose to back former Texas Republican Rep. Ron Paul instead of Trump.

[Bob78164]

The popular vote is not how the President is elected. California, and in particular, LA and SF, is the only reason Clinton got more popular votes. And I for one don't want to be governed by California. That is exactly the reason the founders established the Electoral College.

Congress also has a Constitutional perogative. And it was reinforced by President Obama's precedent of ignoring the enforcement of laws passed by Congress.

Our votes are worth just as much as yours. And it's flatly false to say that we are the only reason she won the popular vote. Secretary Clinton won tens of millions of votes throughout the country.

This is a minority government that fully intends to impose its will on a majority that opposes it. It's my patriotic duty to oppose their efforts with every tool at my disposal. I'll be doing so. --Bob

Bob, there was a popular election in each of the 50 states plus the District of Columbia. Hillary won the popular vote in 20 states and DC. Trump won in 30 states. Quit crying. You are smart enough to know that a pure democracy is one of the worst and oppressive forms of government. So were the Founding Fathers. That's why they didn't establish a pure democracy. You want to devolve the US into a tyranny of the majority because your candidate lost? Yes, you got more hits than our team, but we won because we got more runs across the plate. Them's the rules. The more your side whines, the deeper you dig your hole. You are NOT a majority. Your side is a loud, obnoxious and bullying minority [that is concentrated in a few densely populated areas that do not reflect the views of the rest of the country]. Democratic seats in the Congress and nationwide are at lows not seen since Reconstruction. Get over it.

We got more votes. That makes us a majority. Using political power to impose your will on an unconsenting majority -- well, I think our nation has some historical experience with that.

I will not consent. I will not stand down. And I will sure as hell not accept that the Trump Administration has any moral authority whatsoever. I will use every political and legal tool at my disposal to ensure that the will of the majority is respected. That will include challenging Republican racial gerrymanders, such as the one that occurred in North Carolina, at every opportunity. That will include uncompromising opposition to unqualified cabinet and ambassadorial appointments. It will include very careful and thorough vetting of judicial appointments. And it will include using the many precedents recently decided by the courts to block the Trump Administration every time it steps out of line. --Bob

[BackInTex]

Using political power to impose your will on an unconsenting majority -- well, I think our nation has some historical experience with that.--Bob

Indeed we do.....
Supreme Court dismisses California's Proposition 8 appeal

[Bob78164]

Using political power to impose your will on an unconsenting majority -- well, I think our nation has some historical experience with that.--Bob

Indeed we do.....
Supreme Court dismisses California's Proposition 8 appeal

Bad example. A Governor and an Attorney General elected by a majority of the California population decided not to waste tax dollars on an appeal. Under California law, no one else had standing. The Supreme Court merely respected the will of the people.

And in any event, civil rights aren't subject to a majority vote. That's why North Carolina doesn't get to use a racial gerrymander, even if that's what the majority of the North Carolina people want. --Bob

[BackInTex]

Using political power to impose your will on an unconsenting majority -- well, I think our nation has some historical experience with that.--Bob

Indeed we do.....
Supreme Court dismisses California's Proposition 8 appeal

Bad example. A Governor and an Attorney General elected by a majority of the California population decided not to waste tax dollars on an appeal. Under California law, no one else had standing. The Supreme Court merely respected the will of the people.

And in any event, civil rights aren't subject to a majority vote. That's why North Carolina doesn't get to use a racial gerrymander, even if that's what the majority of the North Carolina people want. --Bob

LOL. Bad example because it won't fit into your warped view of "fairness".

The will of the people. WTF? The people voted TO BAN gay marriage. You can't weasel yourself out of this argument.
Best research I can come up with is that there have been 34 referendums to ban gay marriage. All but one passed. Total votes to ban gay marriage: 43,074,666, votes to not: 26,458,234.

Either you are "for the will of the people", or not. Right? That is your mantra here.

[SportsFan68]

Flock wrote:

Oh, and I preict BJ's clairvoyance is as bad as his spelling.

. . .

Congress also has a Constitutional perogative. And it was reinforced by President Obama's precedent of ignoring the enforcement of laws passed by Congress.

How's yours?

[a1mamacat]

Flock wrote:

Oh, and I preict BJ's clairvoyance is as bad as his spelling.

. . .

Congress also has a Constitutional perogative. And it was reinforced by President Obama's precedent of ignoring the enforcement of laws passed by Congress.

How's yours?

Bwwahhaaahaaa

Sprots WINS!!!!!

[Estonut]

Most of the country's voters wanted Hillary Clinton to be our next President. Most of the country's voters wanted Democrats representing them in the House and in the Senate. Most of the country voted for the current incumbent, who was blocked by a naked power grab from exercising his constitutional perogative to appoint a Justice to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court. What we have here is nothing less than a minority takeover of the entire federal government.

I learned that "most of" means more than half. You are also expressing the desire for a minority takeover of the entire federal government.

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

Superdelagates

[littlebeast13]

Flock wrote:

Oh, and I preict BJ's clairvoyance is as bad as his spelling.

. . .

Congress also has a Constitutional perogative. And it was reinforced by President Obama's precedent of ignoring the enforcement of laws passed by Congress.

How's yours?

Bwwahhaaahaaa

Sprots WINS!!!!!

Not quite.... the "perogative" quote she attributed to flock was actually said by Bob###. Esto quotes it correctly two posts later....

These are the same type of bait and switch tactics Sprots uses to frame Evil Squirrel as a threat to Coloradans...

lb13

[Jeemie]

You do realize that the Democratic candidate for President has won the popular vote in 6 of the last 7 Presidential elections, including the one just concluded?

Most of the country's voters wanted Hillary Clinton to be our next President. Most of the country's voters wanted Democrats representing them in the House and in the Senate. Most of the country voted for the current incumbent, who was blocked by a naked power grab from exercising his constitutional perogative to appoint a Justice to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court. What we have here is nothing less than a minority takeover of the entire federal government.

I expect my Senators and Representative to give the Republicans every bit as much cooperation as the Republicans gave the current incumbent. And now that my firm has committed a substantial block of pro bono time for this purpose, I expect to use my professional talents to use all the tools the law affords those of us in the majority to protect our interests. --Bob

The popular vote is not how the President is elected. California, and in particular, LA and SF, is the only reason Clinton got more popular votes. And I for one don't want to be governed by California. That is exactly the reason the founders established the Electoral College.

Congress also has a Constitutional perogative. And it was reinforced by President Obama's precedent of ignoring the enforcement of laws passed by Congress.

Our votes are worth just as much as yours. And it's flatly false to say that we are the only reason she won the popular vote. Secretary Clinton won tens of millions of votes throughout the country.

This is a minority government that fully intends to impose its will on a majority that opposes it. It's my patriotic duty to oppose their efforts with every tool at my disposal. I'll be doing so. --Bob

We've had lots of Presidents for whom the majority of voters voted for someone else in this nation's history. Including Bill Clinton...both terms.

Did you resist his agenda from being enforced upon the majority of this nation, too?

[Beebs52]

The popular vote is not how the President is elected. California, and in particular, LA and SF, is the only reason Clinton got more popular votes. And I for one don't want to be governed by California. That is exactly the reason the founders established the Electoral College.

Congress also has a Constitutional perogative. And it was reinforced by President Obama's precedent of ignoring the enforcement of laws passed by Congress.

Our votes are worth just as much as yours. And it's flatly false to say that we are the only reason she won the popular vote. Secretary Clinton won tens of millions of votes throughout the country.

This is a minority government that fully intends to impose its will on a majority that opposes it. It's my patriotic duty to oppose their efforts with every tool at my disposal. I'll be doing so. --Bob

We've had lots of Presidents for whom the majority of voters voted for someone else in this nation's history. Including Bill Clinton...both terms.

Did you resist his agenda from being enforced upon the majority of this nation, too?

Of course not, because those electors' consciences were his conscience. Sometimes it's just too easy.

[flockofseagulls104]

I will not consent. I will not stand down. And I will sure as hell not accept that the Trump Administration has any moral authority whatsoever. I will use every political and legal tool at my disposal to ensure that the will of the majority is respected. That will include challenging Republican racial gerrymanders, such as the one that occurred in North Carolina, at every opportunity. That will include uncompromising opposition to unqualified cabinet and ambassadorial appointments. It will include very careful and thorough vetting of judicial appointments. And it will include using the many precedents recently decided by the courts to block the Trump Administration every time it steps out of line. --Bob

Isn't this what Hillary was horrified by when Trump said he'd wait and see whether he would accept the results of the election?

[silverscreenselect]

The will of the people. WTF? The people voted TO BAN gay marriage.

The will of the people, as long as it comports with the Constitution. About 50 years ago, the people in a substantial number of states voted to ban interracial marriage. About 100 years before that, those same people (or, more precisely, their grandparents) kept slavery legal.

[flockofseagulls104]

Flock wrote:



How's yours?

Bwwahhaaahaaa

Sprots WINS!!!!!

Not quite.... the "perogative" quote she attributed to flock was actually said by Bob###. Esto quotes it correctly two posts later....

These are the same type of bait and switch tactics Sprots uses to frame Evil Squirrel as a threat to Coloradans...

lb13

I never knew it was PRE rogative. You learn something every day. I was using Bob's words, but I would have spelled it that way anyway.

[flockofseagulls104]

Flock wrote:

Oh, and I preict BJ's clairvoyance is as bad as his spelling.

. . .

Congress also has a Constitutional perogative. And it was reinforced by President Obama's precedent of ignoring the enforcement of laws passed by Congress.

How's yours?

My preiction was corect.

[BackInTex]

Flock wrote:

Oh, and I preict BJ's clairvoyance is as bad as his spelling.

. . .

Congress also has a Constitutional perogative. And it was reinforced by President Obama's precedent of ignoring the enforcement of laws passed by Congress.

How's yours?

Bwwahhaaahaaa

Sprots WINS!!!!!

Does anyone else see the irony in this?

She's nicknamed Sprots for a reason.

[littlebeast13]

I never knew it was PRE rogative. You learn something every day. I was using Bob's words, but I would have spelled it that way anyway.

Geez, and I'd have figured you for a Bobby Brown fan....

lb13

[BackInTex]

To close out this thread:

Original prediction:
Faithless Trump electors: more than 36
No call on Clinton electors but will assume he predicted all to be faithful

Actual results:
Faithless Trump electors: 2
Faithless Clinton electors: 5 (150% more than Trump's)


This goes along with Bob J's prediction that Trump would not carry a single state.
Actual results: Trump won 30 states

[silverscreenselect]

At least I avoided a "Why Hillary Will Win" diatribe this election.

[flockofseagulls104]

To close out this thread:

Original prediction:
Faithless Trump electors: more than 36
No call on Clinton electors but will assume he predicted all to be faithful

Actual results:
Faithless Trump electors: 2
Faithless Clinton electors: 5 (150% more than Trump's)


This goes along with Bob J's prediction that Trump would not carry a single state.
Actual results: Trump won 30 states

I think the scheme to reverse the results of the election was that 36+ Hillary delegates would break their pledge and vote for some republican to try and sway republican electors to switch their pledged votes for Trump. That preiction was false as well. Only 5 dishonest democrats could be found (surprisingly). Mostly from my state .

[Just an observation: democrats always have schemes to get around things when they don't get their way legally.]

[Bob78164]

The popular vote is not how the President is elected. California, and in particular, LA and SF, is the only reason Clinton got more popular votes. And I for one don't want to be governed by California. That is exactly the reason the founders established the Electoral College.

Congress also has a Constitutional perogative. And it was reinforced by President Obama's precedent of ignoring the enforcement of laws passed by Congress.

Our votes are worth just as much as yours. And it's flatly false to say that we are the only reason she won the popular vote. Secretary Clinton won tens of millions of votes throughout the country.

This is a minority government that fully intends to impose its will on a majority that opposes it. It's my patriotic duty to oppose their efforts with every tool at my disposal. I'll be doing so. --Bob

We've had lots of Presidents for whom the majority of voters voted for someone else in this nation's history. Including Bill Clinton...both terms.

Did you resist his agenda from being enforced upon the majority of this nation, too?

They won pluralities. In Clinton's case, fairly comfortable pluralities. Trump did not. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

Our votes are worth just as much as yours. And it's flatly false to say that we are the only reason she won the popular vote. Secretary Clinton won tens of millions of votes throughout the country.

This is a minority government that fully intends to impose its will on a majority that opposes it. It's my patriotic duty to oppose their efforts with every tool at my disposal. I'll be doing so. --Bob

We've had lots of Presidents for whom the majority of voters voted for someone else in this nation's history. Including Bill Clinton...both terms.

Did you resist his agenda from being enforced upon the majority of this nation, too?

They won pluralities. In Clinton's case, fairly comfortable pluralities. Trump did not. --Bob

By your own standards, Bob, the majority of the American people did not want Clinton to be their President.

I thought you were the more intelligent Bob. I guess I will have to rethink. Your ideology seems to 'trump' any facts that are presented to you. You are an ideal democrat candidate for congress.