Are 21st century Liberals actually Liberal?

Watch
JackG9
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
I've noticed a large amount of protest to Le Donalds presidency. Obviously from the opposition which is the left -who are supposed to support freedom and democracy. Then why must they protest a democratic election and not even give the bloke a chance? I'm not a Trump supporter but if I'd have spent so much time and effort campaigning I'd be quite p*ssed off that people won't even respect the democratic election and give me a chance.
4
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
(Original post by JackG9)
I'm not a Trump supporter but if I'd have spent so much time and effort campaigning I'd be quite p*ssed off that people won't even respect the democratic election and give me a chance.
I'm not a Clinton supporter but if I'd have spent so much time and effort campaigning I'd be quite p*ssed off that the electoral system enabled the candidate who received comfortably fewer votes to be declared the winner.
0
reply
midnightice
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 years ago
#3
(Original post by anarchism101)
I'm not a Clinton supporter but if I'd have spent so much time and effort campaigning I'd be quite p*ssed off that the electoral system enabled the candidate who received comfortably fewer votes to be declared the winner.
Both Trump and Clinton would have campaigned in many different states and with different resources if it was based on the popular vote. That's a silly argument.
2
reply
ThePeoplesРath
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 years ago
#4
At least fascists are honest about being pro-censorship and anti-democracy. These 'liberals' will make you think you are free and then stab you in the back. Very childish...
2
reply
Willy Pete
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#5
Report 3 years ago
#5
They are in fact the opposite.
1
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#6
Report 3 years ago
#6
(Original post by midnightice)
Both Trump and Clinton would have campaigned in many different states and with different resources if it was based on the popular vote. That's a silly argument.
They likely would have done, yes, but that's in no way a defence of the electoral college.
0
reply
midnightice
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#7
Report 3 years ago
#7
(Original post by anarchism101)
They likely would have done, yes, but that's in no way a defence of the electoral college.
I think it is very fair, otherwise California would effectively always decide who was president each time.
0
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#8
Report 3 years ago
#8
(Original post by midnightice)
I think it is very fair, otherwise California would effectively always decide who was president each time.
Not really, California is just 12% of the US population.
0
reply
Willy Pete
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#9
Report 3 years ago
#9
(Original post by anarchism101)
Not really, California is just 12% of the US population.
Just 12%...
1
reply
Pikachū
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#10
Report 3 years ago
#10
The complete opposite. They are the ones trying to prohibit free speech now.
0
reply
JackG9
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#11
(Original post by anarchism101)
I'm not a Clinton supporter but if I'd have spent so much time and effort campaigning I'd be quite p*ssed off that the electoral system enabled the candidate who received comfortably fewer votes to be declared the winner.
That's such a stupid argument. Trump played to win the electoral votes not the popular vote. It's like playing football; trump played to win the game , not to play good football.
0
reply
SHallowvale
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#12
Report 3 years ago
#12
(Original post by JackG9)
I've noticed a large amount of protest to Le Donalds presidency. Obviously from the opposition which is the left -who are supposed to support freedom and democracy. Then why must they protest a democratic election and not even give the bloke a chance? I'm not a Trump supporter but if I'd have spent so much time and effort campaigning I'd be quite p*ssed off that people won't even respect the democratic election and give me a chance.
Protesting a result is not the same thing as protesting democracy.

You don't have to accept the result of an election and 'unite' behind that. If you did then we shouldn't even bother having democracy at all.
0
reply
JackG9
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#13
(Original post by SHallowvale)
Protesting a result is not the same thing as protesting democracy.

You don't have to accept the result of an election and 'unite' behind that. If you did then we shouldn't even bother having democracy at all.
he hasnt even done anything yet lol what you gotta protest about ahaha youre trying to overturn a election through protest
0
reply
StrawbAri
Badges: 17
#14
Report 3 years ago
#14
People normally protest democratic elections when it doesn't favour them. It's not exactly a new thing.
The republicans also protested Obama's election back in 2008.
0
reply
Pikachū
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#15
Report 3 years ago
#15
(Original post by StrawbAri)
People normally protest democratic elections when it doesn't favour them. It's not exactly a new thing.
The republicans also protested Obama's election back in 2008.
They didn't break windows and spraypaint private property.
1
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#16
Report 3 years ago
#16
(Original post by JackG9)
That's such a stupid argument. Trump played to win the electoral votes not the popular vote.
Which is a systemic problem. I'm not blaming Trump for not seeking the popular vote, I'm blaming the electoral college for not requiring and incentivising him to do so.
0
reply
JackG9
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#17
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#17
(Original post by StrawbAri)
People normally protest democratic elections when it doesn't favour them. It's not exactly a new thing.
The republicans also protested Obama's election back in 2008.
Not to the same extent as Trump
0
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#18
Report 3 years ago
#18
(Original post by Pikachū)
They didn't break windows and spraypaint private property.
Property is theft!

Image
0
reply
Shadow Hunters
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#19
Report 3 years ago
#19
(Original post by JackG9)
I've noticed a large amount of protest to Le Donalds presidency. Obviously from the opposition which is the left -who are supposed to support freedom and democracy. Then why must they protest a democratic election and not even give the bloke a chance? I'm not a Trump supporter but if I'd have spent so much time and effort campaigning I'd be quite p*ssed off that people won't even respect the democratic election and give me a chance.
Fact is he's president but that doesn't mean we can't hold him to account. Protests are a key part of the democratic process.
I am wholeheartedly against him getting rid of climate change action, to me climate change is an issue that shouldn't be left until it's too late,
But not only that, he didn't get the most votes! He got over a million less than Clinton. That's odd.
But Abraham Lincoln won the election with less votes than his opponent and he did a great job as president in my opinion. So we'll just have to see but Trumps outlook I don't agree with.
0
reply
StrawbAri
Badges: 17
#20
Report 3 years ago
#20
(Original post by Pikachū)
They didn't break windows and spraypaint private property.
Maybe not exactly but
They behaved pretty badly imo

They even torched a black church smh
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Should there be a new university admissions system that ditches predicted grades?

No, I think predicted grades should still be used to make offers (545)
33.87%
Yes, I like the idea of applying to uni after I received my grades (PQA) (664)
41.27%
Yes, I like the idea of receiving offers only after I receive my grades (PQO) (327)
20.32%
I think there is a better option than the ones suggested (let us know in the thread!) (73)
4.54%

Watched Threads

View All