It all depends on what you define as fair. In our country, if you win the popular vote, you get into power. We think that is fair.
In America, they have a different system entirely that is different to ours. They feel its fair. Just because its vastly different to our set up and also our opinion of what is fair, does not mean it is not fair. All candidates go into it knowing how it works and they work within that system to get their result.
I'm out, this reminds me why I don't discuss politics with other people. No way I'm touching the NZ election next year on social media.
It's not actually inherently democratic because the electoral college often votes against its mandate. In fact one representative of Washington State refused to vote for Hillary even though she won it in this election just gone. So just over 500 people actually have the power to choose the president regardless of who the people actually vote for.
Also the fact that most states vote exclusively for one candidate means that for most Americans their vote simply does not count.
To me democracy is the rule of the majority and the US system is set up in such a way that you can win without the majority supporting you, that isn't a proper democracy.
Since WW2 there have been an equal amount of Democrat and Republican years in power so I don't think it makes things biased in either direction.
There is also the safety net in America of Mid Term elections
It's not actually inherently democratic because the electoral college often votes against its mandate. In fact one representative of Washington State refused to vote for Hillary even though she won it in this election just gone. So just over 500 people actually have the power to choose the president regardless of who the people actually vote for.
Also the fact that most states vote exclusively for one candidate means that for most Americans their vote simply does not count.
To me democracy is the rule of the majority and the US system is set up in such a way that you can win without the majority supporting you, that isn't a proper democracy.
Since WW2 there have been an equal amount of Democrat and Republican years in power so I don't think it makes things biased in either direction.
It's based on population though, if you look at the map the democrats only get a handful of states, whereas the republicans get the vast majority of them. I don't see how it's unfair? As I said the stats show it's pretty even.
I'm out, this reminds me why I don't discuss politics with other people. No way I'm touching the NZ election next year on social media.
You can be the school kids in California and stamp your feet and say no, but what is that actually going to change? Not a fudgeing thing. You just have to accept it and get on with it just like some of the 
crew on here are not going to get what they want. You have to accept it and get on with it.
Its a weird system they use that is outdated. It was set up so people vote and then someone rides to Washington where the electors are and vote on behalf of that area. I know MMP isn't perfect but at least it is a fair system allowing fairer representation of its voters.
Hell of a better system than the American one. And please don't tell me you are against Abortions because that is the potential of what could happen in the states or at least the rights to have them.
Of course, and the Democrats are against it as well, what Hillary said was she supported a ban on late term abortion unless the health of the mother was at risk, that seems very fair to me.
It is funny how it suddenly becomes undemocratic when "the otherside" win.
That is not a thing, purely scare mongering - if you think that is a thing you have been had. Hook, line and sinker.
It is funny how it suddenly becomes undemocratic when "the otherside" win.
That is not a thing, purely scare mongering - if you think that is a thing you have been had. Hook, line and sinker.
She was basically advocating the system we have in NZ which is after 20 weeks you can only abort if the birth could kill or seriously injure the mother.
It is funny how it suddenly becomes undemocratic when "the otherside" win.
That is not a thing, purely scare mongering - if you think that is a thing you have been had. Hook, line and sinker.
That does not take into account any reasons for medically terminating a pregnancy - many women that would have had abortions would have liked to carry to term but are not able to.
Edit: The total abortions you are quoting are overstated it seems, CDC reported over 700k abortions in 2010 and surveys since have shown the number of abortions going down (thanks to increased contraception use) - so overall late term abortions are less than 10k.
And, I take back the hyperbole I used - I was expecting Trump language, which he is basically describing a c-section.
She was basically advocating the system we have in NZ which is after 20 weeks you can only abort if the birth could kill or seriously injure the mother.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441071/hillary-clinton-late-term-abortion-supporter
It is funny how it suddenly becomes undemocratic when "the otherside" win.
That is not a thing, purely scare mongering - if you think that is a thing you have been had. Hook, line and sinker.
That does not take into account any reasons for medically terminating a pregnancy - many women that would have had abortions would have liked to carry to term but are not able to.
And, I take back the hyperbole I used - I was expecting Trump language, which he is basically describing a c-section.
It is funny how it suddenly becomes undemocratic when "the otherside" win.
That is not a thing, purely scare mongering - if you think that is a thing you have been had. Hook, line and sinker.
That does not take into account any reasons for medically terminating a pregnancy - many women that would have had abortions would have liked to carry to term but are not able to.
And, I take back the hyperbole I used - I was expecting Trump language, which he is basically describing a c-section.
If you are worried they do screening tests before 21 weeks to see the likelihood of Downs Syndrome and other genetic disorders, if based on the screening tests and taking into account other risk factors (age etc.) you can get more tests done to get a diagnosis and then determine if you want to abort the pregnancy or not. This is all up the parent/s choice and if any decision is made to terminate the pregnancy based on those conditions it will be done well before 21 weeks.
I have just been through all of this.
It is funny how it suddenly becomes undemocratic when "the otherside" win.
That is not a thing, purely scare mongering - if you think that is a thing you have been had. Hook, line and sinker.
It is funny how it suddenly becomes undemocratic when "the otherside" win.
That is not a thing, purely scare mongering - if you think that is a thing you have been had. Hook, line and sinker.
It is funny how it suddenly becomes undemocratic when "the otherside" win.
That is not a thing, purely scare mongering - if you think that is a thing you have been had. Hook, line and sinker.
That does not take into account any reasons for medically terminating a pregnancy - many women that would have had abortions would have liked to carry to term but are not able to.
And, I take back the hyperbole I used - I was expecting Trump language, which he is basically describing a c-section.
If you are worried they do screening tests before 21 weeks to see the likelihood of Downs Syndrome and other genetic disorders, if based on the screening tests and taking into account other risk factors (age etc.) you can get more tests done to get a diagnosis and then determine if you want to abort the pregnancy or not. This is all up the parent/s choice and if any decision is made to terminate the pregnancy based on those conditions it will be done well before 21 weeks.
I have just been through all of this.
I hope everything was clear.
And @sthn.jeff the National Review is hardly the bastion of independent and politically neutral journalism, you're going to have to find a better source.
It is funny how it suddenly becomes undemocratic when "the otherside" win.
That is not a thing, purely scare mongering - if you think that is a thing you have been had. Hook, line and sinker.
That does not take into account any reasons for medically terminating a pregnancy - many women that would have had abortions would have liked to carry to term but are not able to.
And, I take back the hyperbole I used - I was expecting Trump language, which he is basically describing a c-section.
If you are worried they do screening tests before 21 weeks to see the likelihood of Downs Syndrome and other genetic disorders, if based on the screening tests and taking into account other risk factors (age etc.) you can get more tests done to get a diagnosis and then determine if you want to abort the pregnancy or not. This is all up the parent/s choice and if any decision is made to terminate the pregnancy based on those conditions it will be done well before 21 weeks.
I have just been through all of this.
I hope everything was clear.
And @sthn.jeff the National Review is hardly the bastion of independent and politically neutral journalism, you're going to have to find a better source.
EDIT Sorry it was not you quoting Campbell but second half of my comment stands
It is funny how it suddenly becomes undemocratic when "the otherside" win.
That is not a thing, purely scare mongering - if you think that is a thing you have been had. Hook, line and sinker.
Any medical intervention in the last month is likely to be an induction or a c-section. Trump was misleading when he said ripping them out a day before their due date.
It is funny how it suddenly becomes undemocratic when "the otherside" win.
That is not a thing, purely scare mongering - if you think that is a thing you have been had. Hook, line and sinker.
Any medical intervention in the last month is likely to be an induction or a c-section. Trump was misleading when he said ripping them out a day before their due date.
And the procedure for Partial Birth Abortion is essentially that. Google it and say you are not disturbed by that procedure
This thread is worse than any match thread
This thread is worse than any match thread
You must have seen this coming though.
It is funny how it suddenly becomes undemocratic when "the otherside" win.
That is not a thing, purely scare mongering - if you think that is a thing you have been had. Hook, line and sinker.
Any medical intervention in the last month is likely to be an induction or a c-section. Trump was misleading when he said ripping them out a day before their due date.
And the procedure for Partial Birth Abortion is essentially that. Google it and say you are not disturbed by that procedure
Partial Birth Abortion, a term thought up by a republican senator (IIRC) in the 90's and correctly 'intact dilation and extraction' - used for removing miscarriages as well for terminating, is not as a disturbing procedure as it sounds compared to alternatives. Used even more rarely, is currently banned in many states anyway.
So getting away from internal politics, ultimately it's their country they can do what they want, but they have two policies which are going to effect the world in a very real way.
1. Trump is a Climate Change denier, which is insane in this day and age, in fact he thinks it's a huge conspiracy to keep America down. There is this now infamous tweet.
The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 6, 2012
Madness, climate change is obviously a big problem for some of the countries in our neck of the woods.
2. The pulling back support of NATO, this obviously could be a good thing, however there are some problematic places which can't protect themselves. For instance he has said he sees no point in protecting the Baltic countries, which have a very large and persecuted Russian minority. I can see Russia using this as a reason to annex parts or all of those countries from the EU with humanitarian grounds as an excuse, I can also see a Russian supported separatist movement starting from within as there are a lot of seriously unhappy people with absolutely no future the way things stand.
