Hmmmm.....I went to public schools in California in the 80's, they were well above average, head and shoulders above public school in Texas. Granted, I went in Los Altos Hills and Palo Alto, neither hurting for tax funds. I'm not sure how they keep the lights on up here in Humboldt county.

You may be right, but even a confirmed pessimist like me has a hard time believing Trumpsters are now average intelligence, 100 IQ. That would make me Einstein, and I'm no Einstein.

Yes, there are more dumb people than intelligent....it's up to the intelligent to use their brains to get around that. It's not a new concept, it's why we have an electoral college.

Why can't I pick up my gun, do my duty to cull the American herd of the mentally feeble, then move to New Zealand? ;-)

The thing about the screaming loonies is they think they're tough, but the first time someone returns fire more than half will piss themselves and drop their guns in terror. Those pansies are afraid of deer. They love to be tough thinking only right wingers own guns....they're wrong. I've got many.

Yeah.....I'm not going to France no matter what happens. I'd move to NZ in a heartbeat though.

Wouldn't have if the electoral college didn't exist and wasn't susceptible to its corporate puppetmasters, bending to their agenda.

So it's done then

No president has ever been removed from office, and have always followed the same pattern of impeachment in the house and non removal in the senate
It's the biggest disgrace anyone in the office of president has yet received.

A slap in the face from the electorate.

It is well deserved.

*dupeof=https://videosift.com/video/Americas-Broken-Electoral-System-Some-More-News

No, I don't talk as if there has never been an amendment. It doesn't even make sense to suggest that since I'm referring to the 2nd Amendment.

Changing the constitution is very difficult. It was made that way on purpose. Article 5:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Five_of_the_United_States_Constitution

"Only inaction and unsupported, unpopular opposition has prevented the government from effectively regulating, not inability."

Whether you believe it is unsupported or unpopular has no bearing on anything. Just to be clear, I never wrote or implied they don't have the ability, only that the constitution prevents "government from effectively regulating arms."

The party in power may not fully represent your views, or the views of the people who directly support the party, no party ever does. But enough Americans wanted them in, and not the opposition who resoundingly lost, that they rule the roost. Considering how many Americans don't vote there is no such thing as a majority of Americans - there can only be a majority of those who vote. And this is not a measure for winning an election. The measure for winning is electoral college votes. The rules were set, one side played it better, the other side lost and whined about the rules.

"You just implied strongly that you're just a sock puppet for Vladimir....AKA @bobknight33....and @wtfcaniuse didn't assume your stance on gun control, he derided your (bob's) snarky but incorrect assessment of our popular opinion and shooting statistics.
Who's being dumb now?!"

I'll answer straight up. You. You are acting dumb. And paranoid. I don't know who those people are. Your "popular opinion" of what? I literally gave links to authoritative statistics for anything under contention. You need to see someone about your mental state.

Try to make people feel welcome. There is a reason this website is sinking into obscurity (look at the rankings).

Duh, Bob. Your insecurities and ignorance are showing.

If the Russians interfered, clearly in favor of Trump, it's impossible that Trump won fair and square. Jebus fucking Christ. Trump won fair and square by cheating the system with illegal help from our enemies.

Carter still has more intelligence, honesty, and civility in his little toe nail than Trump's entire nepotistic family. He's also in better physical shape, Trump would die trying to do 1/4 the work Carter does daily. You forget, he was a nuclear submarine commander/designer. Trump at his best has never come close to Carter at his worst.
Also, Carter has nearly single handedly eradicated the guinea worm...hardly the work of the feeble. Name a humanitarian project Trump has been involved in that he not used as a personal piggy bank. You can't.

They started investigating and found interference for one candidate's benifit, granted they should have made it as public as the Clinton investigation that found nothing but Comey refused to mention it, since they found massive interference on behalf of Trump, Obama sanctioned Russia. Trump calls that investigation a witch hunt and illegally told Russia he would remove the sanctions day one (violating the Logan act, his messenger was convicted of that)....and has now publicly invited Russia to help him again, offering them a presidential shield from investigation or repercussions.

Trump lost the election by over 3million votes, but barely won the electoral college with foreign help he begged for during the campaign repeatedly, and has requested again.

Trump, and by extension you, are bitter "winners"....bitter because your win is illegitimate, and you know it.

I'm so sick of this "polls were all wrong" lie. The polls all said he could be elected, it was within the margin of error, and if you count votes not the electoral college, they were dead on correct....Clinton won.

Now, since Christian preachers all now stump far right hate politics directly from the pulpit., can we remove their tax exemption and let Cesar have what belongs to Cesar?

Side note....he seems to be describing the rapture, Christians suddenly dying world wide and going to heaven....and he seems terrified about it. I can't imagine why.

Upvote for exposing what Christian preachers are telling their flock, inciting murder as preemptive self defense....not because I agree with his insanity.

As I understand it, numerous states are changing their electoral rules so all their electoral college votes go to the winner of the national vote count. Not perfect, but it's a start.

Trump's presidency? It certainly is a sham.

No surprise you can't understand plain English. Being in a cult of personality has destroyed your less than stellar brain.
You describe Trump lying under oath as him being smart to not implicate himself but don't realize that means you admit the truth is he's a criminal.

Mueller said exactly what he means, DOJ rules did not allow him to even consider criminal charges, but congress can...here's 400 pages of evidence about multiple high crimes that does not in any way exonerate the president. Congress has a duty to examine and act on that evidence. You hear that as "total exoneration, case closed".

What about the other three scandals that were exposed today? How will you excuse today's undeniable criminality, unpatriotic incivility, and his admission that his presidency is illegitimate?

One, perjury by dozens of official Trumpees about the racist census changes that prove they were designed to give "Republicans and non Hispanic whites an electoral advantage" and hurt the Democrats, and would have that effect according to studies they also hid and lied under oath about. Proof of the racist conspiracy going back to 2015 was uncovered, contradicting their testimony that the order came directly from the DOJ based on questions first raised in 2017. Gonna just wait until 10am to hear the party line in court, then whatever new lie they tell will be your answer I expect.

Two, the constantly shifting denial of the official Whitehouse orders to hide the John McCain and barring of sailors from the ship from events because the Biggest Loser throws a childish temper tantrum when he hears or reads the name. Gonna blame that on a subordinate and deny responsibility for those under him acting incredibly, offensively unpatriotic and disrespecting the military on his behalf in his name purely to stroke his ego...."with good intentions" (keeping Trump's ego unbruised), and just ignore the reason they had to do it too I expect.

Three, the accidental admission that Russia actually got him elected. That you'll call an intentional misunderstanding of a poorly worded tweet by the fake news lefty media not a Freudian slip or confession I expect.

Thanks for the opportunity to shine more light on more daily proof he's illegitimate, unfit for office, and surrounded by unscrupulous and lawless sycophants.

This infantile lie over a narcissistic vendetta against a dead American War Hero by a draft dodging business failure and liar and his sycophants comes the day after they were caught lying under oath about adding citizenship questions to the census. Fortunately, the estranged daughter of Thomas Hofeller, who's involvement the administration had hidden and denied under oath, found and turned over hidden hard drives in his effects outlining his significant involvement to the ACLU, actually proving he orchestrated the addition and personally drafted the letter from the DOJ to the Commerce Department that instigated the addition to create a "structural electoral advantage for Republicans and non-Hispanic whites" and a "disadvantage to Democrats". His records also outlined a study he did in 2015 that showed exactly that same outcome from the addition of the question, despite the administration claiming under oath that the idea was first suggested by administration officials in 2017 without outside involvement or studies.
The administration has been given until 10am Friday to address this evidence of perjury by multiple officials.

Edit: and this morning he tweeted he had no part in Russia helping him get elected....which he later realized was an admission that he's an illegitimate president elected because of help from our enemy. The dumb just never stops from the Biggest Loser in Cheat.

This is how you build an electorate that will vote Republican.

To be fair, the electoral college system does make a lot of votes pointless. A Texan Democrat and a Californian Republican don’t really have a say. It’s just a fundamentally broken system and should be scrapped immediately.

There really is no defence for it.

What would you recommend for an alternative here? There are inevitably going to be seniors who don't have family available to help them, and who reach a point where they're unable to care for themselves. I can only think of four options at that point:
1) Hope there's a local charity that is willing to take care of them, has adequate funding to do so, and isn't abusive. If this is unregulated there's a high likelihood of abuse occurring, and if it is regulated then you have government involved, which appears to be something you'd oppose. There's also the issue of unequal access - if it's charitable then it's inherently not mandated, so it's nearly certain some people will not have any such charity in their area (see #3).
2) Somehow have private, non-charitable entities handle it? I've no idea how this would work, as any non-charity is pretty much by definition motivated by profit, and a profit motive plus caring for the elderly is certain to lead to abuse (perhaps not in all cases, but I'd expect it to be quite common).
3) Nothing / good luck, oldies.
4) Government intercession.

In this case, a safety net facilitated by the government strikes me as the best of the available options. The problems highlighted in the video seem likely to stem from insufficient oversight and planning. I'd wager that's due to lack of funding, as this is exactly the sort of program which would be seen as a low-risk target when budget cuts come around, at least from an electoral perspective. After all, if the people impacted by this are those who don't already have people in their life who care for and can advocate for them, and being put under guardianship removes their voting rights, then where's the harm to a politician in reducing the funding?

It seems to me that a well-funded guardianship program, with proper oversight in place, would have the best chance of minimizing the suffering of elderly individuals who can no longer care for themselves. I can understand the libertarian preference for minimal governmental interference in the lives of the public, but this strikes me as a case where that simply doesn't work. If you can think of a viable option #5, or can make a case for 1, 2, or 3 being legitimately more helpful than a well-run option #4 (which is clearly NOT what's discussed in the video), I'm absolutely open to considering it. At the same time, implementing #4 in a way which doesn't leave it vulnerable to budgetary volatility is also a not-insignificant challenge.

Damn, I'm procrastinating really well tonight. That was long.

Do you see how these two sentences of yours are at odds?

If she was the kind of person to turn her back on the millions of people who supported her and voted for her because someone else got more electoral college votes, what does that imply about her character?

I'm with you on almost all of this.

However, I *still* wouldn't vote for Hillary if it was a Trump / Hillary rematch in 2020 (I voted for Stein, would happily have voted for her or Johnson).

I see the current Trump presidency as a "teaching moment". It teaches a lot of things to people that need to learn them: The electoral college is bullshit. Be careful who you vote for. Don't trust the promises of *any* goddamn politician, ever. If the opponent party is running somebody with a lot of negative baggage, maybe try a milquetoast "bland but acceptable" candidate instead of going full tilt with your own baggage-laden candidate. And on and on.

If 2020 turns out to be Trump vs Clinton again, then clearly those lessons haven't sunk in yet. So, as George Costanza once said: "Wanna get nuts? LETS GET NUTS!"