Lunch in the West Wing today.

Status
Not open for further replies.
No doubt the menu is whatever Hilary's advance team asked for. Her team was very thorough in all things protocol but couldn't get her elected. The Thursday meeting of the old and incoming Presidents is a long standing tradition. I bet she had a menu request and they probably just went with it even though she won't be there.

Hopefully there will be Marine Corps birthday cake.
 
  1. The thought process behind the Electoral College was partly to prevent a demagogue from getting elected by popular vote ..... Hmmm ..... Irony?
  2. As Alexander Hamilton writes in “The Federalist Papers,” the Constitution is designed to ensure “that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.” The point of the Electoral College is to preserve “the sense of the people,” while at the same time ensuring that a president is chosen “by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice.”.... Hmmm.....Fail?
 
Last edited:
I thought we lived in a democracy, but according to the press, Hilary Clinton received more votes than Donald Trump, yet he becomes president. Time to scrap the 18th Century procedure which was fine back then, but outdated now. Why on earth is a simple majority vote not used? Perhaps Trump was right and the election was rigged!!

We do live, and will continue to live in a democracy. If the popular vote was used, then the three most populous states would elect the president. The electoral vote gives small populated states a say in the election.

The constitution is not an out dated document.
 
No, no, no ..... Zeldman's argument is more that for a Rebublic Federation (of States).... Democracy relies more on the one man, one vote principle.
 
Last edited:
  1. The thought process behind the Electoral College was partly to prevent a demagogue from getting elected by popular vote ..... Hmmm ..... Irony?
  2. As Alexander Hamilton writes in “The Federalist Papers,” the Constitution is designed to ensure “that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.” The point of the Electoral College is to preserve “the sense of the people,” while at the same time ensuring that a president is chosen “by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice.”.... Hmmm.....Fail?

I don't disagree that there were better candidates. Bernie Sanders was at least (or seemed to be) an honest man who was honest about what he wanted to get done. I am not a Democrat and would NOT have voted for him, but I respect him a hell of a lot more than Hillary. So while I can agree with you on a certain level I don't agree that Hillary would have been a better choice. But we may just have to disagree and that is OKAY despite but what some people think.
 
loctite242.jpg


:lol:
...
 
I think what happened was the major media demonized anyone who would even think of supporting/voting for Trump that people didn't want to tell the pollsters that was how they were planning to vote.

Look at the pictures of the rallies. Hundreds showed up for Hillary and thousands showed up for Trump. So many that at many rallies there were thousands outside that couldn't get in due to capacity.

Same happened for Bernie. He had huge crowds. Bernie's crowds were larger than Hillary's. But that wasn't the story the media wanted to sell. Bernie got more money from more people than Hillary during the primary, but the Democratic machine, run by Clinton people, were having none of it.

The story here is to be careful believing what you hear from the media. Any of them.
What the media really did was follow trump and simply report what he said, what he did, and what his followers said and did. Mainly, they simply let the cameras roll. It was a real dog and pony show. Reagan or Eisenhower would not have stayed in the same room with him much less have voted for him.
 
What the media really did was follow trump and simply report what he said, what he did, and what his followers said and did.

Which media though? I looked at it all and it was amazing at the difference in coverage. The right wing press pretty much ignored Trump's controversial statements and concentrated instead on Hillary's emails. The left wing press pretty much concentrated on Trump's more controversial statements and ignored much of the discussion around the emails... Both sides were wrong and biased to some degree.

The large block of voters who got Trump elected I'm going to go out on a limb and say they are probably getting their news from the right wing press. Fox News after all is the number 1 watched cable news network. If all you do is get your news from Fox News, Trump looks great and Hillary not so much.

I for one am very disappointed but willing to wait and see what the guy can do. Give him a chance. We don't really have any other choice at this point.
 
What the media really did was follow trump and simply report what he said, what he did, and what his followers said and did. Mainly, they simply let the cameras roll. It was a real dog and pony show. Reagan or Eisenhower would not have stayed in the same room with him much less have voted for him.
Funny, the media avoided doing the exact same thing with Candidate C . But there's no bias.
 
Which media though? I looked at it all and it was amazing at the difference in coverage. The right wing press pretty much ignored Trump's controversial statements and concentrated instead on Hillary's emails. The left wing press pretty much concentrated on Trump's more controversial statements and ignored much of the discussion around the emails... Both sides were wrong and biased to some degree.

The large block of voters who got Trump elected I'm going to go out on a limb and say they are probably getting their news from the right wing press. Fox News after all is the number 1 watched cable news network. If all you do is get your news from Fox News, Trump looks great and Hillary not so much.

I for one am very disappointed but willing to wait and see what the guy can do. Give him a chance. We don't really have any other choice at this point.
Newsflash, Fox News is not the right wing press.
 
Yes. Here in LA they were acting a fool last night. Vandalism downtown. Obstructing traffic. And throwing stuff at police in Santa Ana. In a state that voted for Hillary.

"I hate Pizza Hut! I'm going to go protest Domino's!"


There was also a shooting at a polling place in aszusa. :(
 
This is why we can't have nice things. People have to throw partisan punches....

And, respectfully, the MC should be quicker to pull the trigger if we're going to have rules. I mean, there is a guy on this forum (and this thread) with a user icon mocking other peoples religions for crying out loud. Has been there for as long as I can remember. No idea why that and the other partisan stuff here is permitted if we have rules that say otherwise.
 
Pilots of Americaaaaaa! I just love saying that. Lets all say it together in unison, "Pilots of Americaaaaaa!"

*end thread*
 
I don't disagree that there were better candidates. Bernie Sanders was at least (or seemed to be) an honest man who was honest about what he wanted to get done. I am not a Democrat and would NOT have voted for him, but I respect him a hell of a lot more than Hillary. So while I can agree with you on a certain level I don't agree that Hillary would have been a better choice. But we may just have to disagree and that is OKAY despite but what some people think.
Where in my posts did I state, or even imply, for whom I may have voted? Nowhere.
But I agree that America needs a President like B Sanders - I could not support his candidacy though because the electorate is not prepared (read: too biased) to elect anyone with the trigger word Socialist associated with his name, and would even more surely have led to a Republican land slide.
 
Where in my posts did I state, or even imply, for whom I may have voted? Nowhere.
But I agree that America needs a President like B Sanders - I could not support his candidacy though because the electorate is not prepared (read: too biased) to elect anyone with the trigger word Socialist associated with his name, and would even more surely have led to a Republican land slide.

Woah relax bud. Wasn't trying to attack you by any means.
 
Woah relax bud. Wasn't trying to attack you by any means.
Where in my posts do I come off as anything but relaxed?
Project much? ;)
 
Last edited:
I need to find my safe space!!!!!
?why? - it's not a dirty word and Bernie self-applied the title. I'm probably a Socialist....just never got the card to carry. :)
 
And, respectfully, the MC should be quicker to pull the trigger if we're going to have rules. I mean, there is a guy on this forum (and this thread) with a user icon mocking other peoples religions for crying out loud. Has been there for as long as I can remember. No idea why that and the other partisan stuff here is permitted if we have rules that say otherwise.
We are not going to monitor people's icons or signatures unless they are over the top out of line and someone reports them. You can hide them under personal details > preferences. But now you'll probably get all the troublemakers to change their signatures to something they think will bother you. Thanks a lot. :rolleyes2:

Seriously, we have a rule here. We have tried numerous times to allow reasonable discussion but it always turns into partisan bashing. The Spin Zone, for those who remember it, is gone.

Hangar Talk
Open forum for discussion of any topic you like, aviation related or otherwise.

Virtually all topics in this forum are permitted - so long as they are discussed in a civil manner.

NOTE: Politics and religion and any other topic likely to become highly charged are not allowed, and threads may be deleted or closed if they start or trend, respectively, towards "spin" topics.
 
Last edited:
?why? - it's not a dirty word and Bernie self-applied the title. I'm probably a Socialist....just never got the card to carry. :)

Bernie would have provided free planes to all!
 
And, respectfully, the MC should be quicker to pull the trigger if we're going to have rules. I mean, there is a guy on this forum (and this thread) with a user icon mocking other peoples religions for crying out loud. Has been there for as long as I can remember. No idea why that and the other partisan stuff here is permitted if we have rules that say otherwise.

So whose user icon mocks religions?
 
?why? - it's not a dirty word and Bernie self-applied the title. I'm probably a Socialist....just never got the card to carry. :)
AHHHH There it is again!!!!! Mommy!!!!!

ps "Probably"? ;)

pps At least Bernie is, IMO, an honest man. Even though he never held a job until middle age.
 
AHHHH There it is again!!!!! Mommy!!!!!

ps "Probably"? ;)

pps At least Bernie is, IMO, an honest man. Even though he never held a job until middle age.
See there .... I pulled that trigger again. o_O
(I see what you did there) LOL
 
Yeah what he said, except I don't like cats. :D

I'm actually not a big fan of cats...although my girlfriend's grandma's cat is kind of cool. Except for when he hisses at you
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top