How low can you go?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-apos-approval-rating-190300259.html

https://youtu.be/3uyy0VHSwM8

American voters believe 54 - 43 percent that President Donald Trump is abusing the powers of his office, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today.

Then why did they vote him in?

The same poalls that gave him no chance to win the nomination, said he lost all the debates, and said he’d lose to teh PIAPS. His supporters have not given up - they tend to love him more when he touches magic orbs and owns some other Prime Ministers.

https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/inside-a-bdsm-dungeon-with-a-hillary-dom-and-a-guilty-diaper-clad-trump-voter?utm_source=vicefbus&campaign=global

He lost the popular vote - try to keep up

1 Like

Because of the illegals voating in Cali.

Of which you have no proof

Simple, half of the people that voted “for” trump were actually voting against Clinton.

Bull. Shit.

2 Likes

I found this to be true with all the Americans I know IRL, with the exception of one who is a die hard republican. The rest voted for Trump because they hated Hillary.

Yer out of yer ever lovin mind. He won because of gerrymandering and the absurd electoral college system. Plain and simple. We need to do some law changing round here.

He won a duly constituted election.

The use of electoral colleges in western democracy is commonplace…not that you’d know what happens outside your own cesspool. The government under which I currently live won an election with around 47% of the popular vote. The number of votes does NOT carry an election, to prevent larger populated electorates from skewing the result. It is the same in the UK, Australia, Germany and probably Canada.

Do try to learn a little bit of your own electoral system and the purpose of its structure.

Did the loser get a majority of the votes?

No. The side that won the election did not get the majority of votes. That’s how it works. And, history tells us it has cut both ways. If we didn’t have such a system, larger electorates would swing the election one way or the other, so that people living in less populated electoral zones have little influence on the outcome of an election.

This is unfair, and disenfranchises rural people in particular.

All democracies run a collegiate type system in one form or another. Otherwise, political parties would simply work where the majority of people live, and screw the rest.

When discussing popularity and approval rating post election, the votes of a said election are not relevant.

The discussion is not whether he won or if he won fairly or not. He won the election. That doesn’t mean people have to like, agree with, or support his presidency.

I asked you if the loser got the majority of votes, like in the 2016 election in the US.

You don’t understand how this works in the USA. During the primaries, political parties literally ignore California, where 40 million people live, because we vote so late in the primaries. Is it OKAY to disenfranchise 40 million people in order to appease a few thousand snowflakes?

Sigh…why do I bother…

Yes, the loser got the majority of votes.

Australian Labor Party WIN 47.0% −1.4 23 −3
Liberal Party of Australia 53.0% +1.4 22 +4

Like I said, 47% of the vote, but they won government.

We’re not bitching, because unlike you, we seem to grasp the fundamental principle that in a democracy, everyone’s vote must count. Not just those in the major metropolitan areas.