If you wanted to rig your enemies election...

HIMBOB said:
If you were a world leader and wanted to rig your enemies election which of the following would be desirable outcomes?

Winner losing the popular vote

Increase divides within the country

Increase debt on nonproductive assets

Reduce innovation

Reduce environmental protections

Increase wealth disparity

Weaken energy infrastructure

Build distrust in the political process

Isolate the country from its Allies

Decrease chance of new alliances

Decrease national defence capability short term.

Decrease national defence capability long term.


Which of the above seems desirable and what else would you want to do?


EDIT: we are into page 3 and still no one has suggested something else a rigger would want nor have they attempted to refute anything I said. Come on people I doubt my list was perfect on the First attempt.

I want suggestions people!!!!! ( And no they don't have to be displayed by the current admin).
Click to expand...

Only one of these things happened and its been pointed out the popular vote doesn't mean anything.

If I wanted to subvert a government i'd back a morally bankrupt career politician that had a 97% chance to win. The one who's every words were anti liberty and anti freedom. The one who would have tried to disarm the populace. The one who said colored criminals were less than human, even calling them super predators.

Then I'd attack the character of anyone who voiced an opinion opposite my own. I'd call them irrelevant names like Nazi and racist when my own candidate was the one pushing socialism/fascism and racism.

So if I wanted to fuck over America, I'd have supported HRC.
 
Starman said:
Because it was being cited as a reason why Trump's victory was illegitimate, and why Hillary deserved to win. But I understand why you want to try and omit the context of this entire discussion, because you come off looking worse than you do even now.



I didn't assume anything, and you didn't imply anything. I said the popular vote was a joke (the popular vote that was being used to justify the claim that Hillary Clinton was somehow the rightful winner of the election.)

You sarcastically asked why should we care what the "majority" thinks? Again, this is in reference to the popular vote. I then correctly pointed out that the "majority" didn't vote for Hillary. (They didn't).

You said that's not how majorities work. (It is.) If your reference to "the majority" wasn't to the voters being accounted for in the popular vote, then what the hell was it in reference to?



You weren't talking about the majority of people who voted in the election? Again, that was the entire context of my initial statement. If you weren't talking about the majority of voters, what majority were you talking about?



Majority of what? The majority of voters? No, they didn't. They didn't support Clinton either. So, again, what is your point?
Click to expand...

I was never talking about Hillary Clinton.

She lost. Get over it.
 
Starman said:
A.) You engage in name-calling and profanity and tell me to "calm my tits." Are you irony impaired by any chance?

B.) I did, and I responded. Since you are asking a hypothetical question about imaginary people doing imaginary things, trying to ascribe motivations or desires is futile, as the only thing they'd want is what I'd imagine them to want.

C.) Read point B until you are able to discern reality from fantasy. If you've got a point to make, make it. Try engaging in a real conversation about things happening in the real world, instead of in your head.



You've been done, you just didn't know it.
Click to expand...


A. Calm your tits,
B. Read the original question I asked,
C. Repeat steps A through B till you understand the question.
 
TSO said:
Only one of these things happened and its been pointed out the popular vote doesn't mean anything.

If I wanted to subvert a government i'd back a morally bankrupt career politician that had a 97% chance to win. The one who's every words were anti liberty and anti freedom. The one who would have tried to disarm the populace. The one who said colored criminals were less than human, even calling them super predators.

Then I'd attack the character of anyone who voiced an opinion opposite my own. I'd call them irrelevant names like Nazi and racist when my own candidate was the one pushing socialism/fascism and racism.

So if I wanted to fuck over America, I'd have supported HRC.
Click to expand...

Thanks for actually answering the question.

I feel most of that falls under "increase divides within the country".

The last bit is Actions you'd take not results you would want.

Disarm the populace is valid. Wouldn't always be desirable but if planning military incursion it would be.

The corruption thing falls partially under "Build distrust in the political process" but I can't figure out how to word it correctly as a separate goal. Any suggestions ?
 
Rational Poster said:
I was never talking about Hillary Clinton.
Click to expand...

Then what was your point replying to me? Because my response, and the person I was responding to, was in the context of the popular vote.

If you weren't referencing the election when you used the words "the majority", then what the hell were you referencing?

She lost. Get over it.
Click to expand...

Get over it how? I'm glad she lost. Trump won the majority of the states and the majority of the electorate. He won the election fair and square. How about you get over that?
 
HIMBOB said:
A. Calm your tits,
B. Read the original question I asked,
C. Repeat steps A through B till you understand the question.
Click to expand...

A.) You engage in name-calling and profanity and tell me to "calm my tits." Are you irony impaired by any chance?

B.) I did, and I responded. Since you are asking a hypothetical question about imaginary people doing imaginary things, trying to ascribe motivations or desires is futile, as the only thing they'd want is what I'd imagine them to want.

C.) Read point B until you are able to discern reality from fantasy. If you've got a point to make, make it. Try engaging in a real conversation about things happening in the real world, instead of in your head.
 
Starman said:
Then what was your point replying to me? Because my response, and the person I was responding to, was in the context of the popular vote.

If you weren't referencing the election when you used the words "the majority", then what the hell were you referencing?



Get over it how? I'm glad she lost. Trump won the majority of the states and the majority of the electorate. He won the election fair and square. How about you get over that?
Click to expand...

You seemed to imply that the popular vote has no value by calling it a joke. I don't think it's a joke.
 
Rational Poster said:
You seemed to imply that the popular vote has no value by calling it a joke. I don't think it's a joke.
Click to expand...
the overall popular vote has no value. You could get 30+ million votes from just Cali and NY. Those two leftist strongholds shouldn't and rightfully don't dictate elections.
 
Starman said:
A.) You engage in name-calling and profanity and tell me to "calm my tits." Are you irony impaired by any chance?

B.) I did, and I responded. Since you are asking a hypothetical question about imaginary people doing imaginary things, trying to ascribe motivations or desires is futile, as the only thing they'd want is what I'd imagine them to want.

C.) Read point B until you are able to discern reality from fantasy. If you've got a point to make, make it. Try engaging in a real conversation about things happening in the real world, instead of in your head.
Click to expand...

You have yet to answer the question this thread is asking you to answer.

If you feel you have please quote it or answer it now, otherwise please go and derail another thread.
 
HIMBOB said:
You have yet to answer the question this thread is asking you to answer.

If you feel you have please quote it or answer it now, otherwise please go and derail another thread.
Click to expand...

I did answer it, RimJob. You are asking a hypothetical question about imaginary people doing imaginary things. Trying to ascribe motivations or desires is futile, as the only thing they'd want is what I'd imagine them to want. Right or wrong?
 
Starman said:
I did answer it, RimJob. You are asking a hypothetical question about imaginary people doing imaginary things. Trying to ascribe motivations or desires is futile, as the only thing they'd want is what I'd imagine them to want. Right or wrong?
Click to expand...

If you were a world leader and wanted to rig your enemies election which of the following would be desirable outcomes?
 
HIMBOB said:
If you were a world leader and wanted to rig your enemies election which of the following would be desirable outcomes?
Click to expand...

Second conditional. Again, it is imaginary. It has no basis in the real world. For example, if I rigged the election of another country, I would want some hot milf from Norway in power and feeling very thankful towards me. Now what purpose did that serve?

You would do better, I think, to have a conversation about reality, and not fantasy.
 
Starman said:
Second conditional. Again, it is imaginary. It has no basis in the real world. For example, if I rigged the election of another country, I would want some hot milf from Norway in power and feeling very thankful towards me. Now what purpose did that serve?

You would do better, I think, to have a conversation about reality, and not fantasy.
Click to expand...

So you can't answer the question you repeatedly told me you already answered.
 
HereticBD said:
The turnout was just 58% of eligible voters. Hillary Clinton did not receive the support of 53% of Americans.
Click to expand...

I never said she did.

53% of the voters that voted voted for anyone but Donald Trump.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,907
Messages
55,454,481
Members
174,787
Latest member
Gladiator47

Share this page

Back
Top