torresgirl

I'm not against a proportional system in principle, my main point was that you can't assume the outcome based on the Populate vote in this election as the vote would play out differently if the rules were different from the outset. I'm sure we all remember UKIP complaining after getting over 3m votes and just 1 MP! Which didn't seem fair. I'm just not sure you can get to a system that everyone would agree was fair but in the end the Electoral College is winner takes all in each state (with a couple of exceptions) The democrat strongholds are more densely populated yes but if you look at the Electoral Map outside of those urban areas its a sea of Red, which is what I meant by the majority of the country.

That was my mistake should be 30-20! I added the 2 which haven't been finalised yet for some reason! DOH! Blonde moment :lol:

I do understand the disappointment of Hillary supporters here in regards to the Electoral college vs the popular vote argument but popular vote is not what the election was fought on. If it was one person one vote from day 1 there is no reason to think the result on the popular result would be the same. For example I live in a very safe Labour seat and if I am a Conservative voter my vote is pretty much worthless at a general election. I have spoken to people before who don't bother voting because its a "safe seat" (goes both ways of course) But in reality Clinton is only ahead in the PV (at the moment by 0.4%) because of 1 state, California, which she won by a huge margin. A very large majority of the country pretty much voted against her, in the end it will be 31 states to 21 states in Trump's favour. He's going to end up with 306 electoral votes. This is no Bush/Gore. The EU referendum shows more people come out to vote in a one person one vote system because every vote counts. There's no reason to think it would change the result here if that was the deal from the outset. Looking at the data. More women than expected and also more Hispanics voted for Trump, almost 30% despite every thing was said about "The Wall" Is not a given Hillary would win. I'm just not sure that if Trump had won the popular vote by winning Texas by a huge margin and lost the presidency on EV Hillary supporters would be dissing the system. In the end if you are passionate about something and you lose, you are always going to feel hard done by.

Yes I realise its has a bigger population but at least the states do get proportioned in some way. Its worse here. I know they are re-doing the boundaries so its fairer but still.

I'm not necessarily against a proportional system here or there but I think the electoral college is pretty fair. California gets twice as many "points" as any other state for example and you could also argue that a President could be elected by winning relatively few states. Hillary got 85 electoral votes just for California and New York. The map actually favours Democrats. We all discussed how Trumps path was much harder. I'm just not sure the minority rule argument is relevant here as it looks like Trump will end up with more votes anyway and even at this point the difference is so small. I think they underestimated him and neglected their heartlands (Wisconsin and Michigan only visited at the last minute) he targeted them and won.

CNN are projecting when all the votes are in Trump will be winning the popular vote too but regardless the argument doesn't really make a lot of sense as the candidates based their campaigns on the system and target the battleground states. Trump didn't bother with California and New York for example as he knew it was pointless. They both would have targeted differently if it was one person one vote and the result cannot be predicted. http://edition.cnn.com/election/results

It will be fun to analyse afterwards. It could just be more Dems have voted early than before? Or the record numbers of independents that are being recorded are first time Trump voters. We don't even know if Registered Republicans are voting for Trump or Democrats for Hillary. Could be misleading on a lot of fronts given this election doesn't seem to follow the same rules as previous ones. Not long until we will know :)

I'm not so sure about Nevada. Trump will have a much bigger turnout on the day and most of whats being reported is not taking independents into account. I saw these figures posted and I think it could be quite accurate. Given the massive push the Dems have made to get the vote early (for obvious reasons) I don't think its a big enough gap to cancel out what will happen on election day. Its one scenario but given as above independents break for Trump its not unrealistic. https://twitter.com/mitchellvii/status/795236726050525184 Its going to be interesting that's for sure. Hillary's main problem is the enthusiasm for her is nowhere near that of Obama. There are already many reports of the African American vote being lower at this stage than in 2012 for example. She needs that vote to be strong to win this.

Hello everyone been reading your discussions but haven't commented for a while. Although I don't think Trump will get 40 states Peacemob :) I do think he has a good chance of winning. The early voting in Colorado shows we may be in for a big surprise. Dems vote in much bigger numbers in the early voting and Trump is already tied. Qassandra he held a big rally there a couple of days ago. He's doing 4-5 a day at the moment https://twitter.com/morlando125/status/794963837900488704. Given most polls show independents favouring Trump and the below poll of voting intention on election day, he has a real shot at this. https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/...289419771158528 For what its worth my prediction. If Trump wins the following where avg polling shows him up (RCP average) GA,OH,NH,ME2,NC,NV,AZ, IA & takes then FL he's at exactly 270 (including "safe" and leaning Rep states) I think it shows they are worried throwing Obama at Michigan. Ive also seen various polls where on Election day voters in Florida showing Trump leading 10-15 points. This is going to be a close election at the very least.

I'm not sure if the people mentioning streams know the ceremony is on Sky Movies Oscars (Channel 304) live from 1.30am or don't have access to Sky? Anyway just thought I'd mention in case.

I would love to stay up (hoping to see Leo win) but have to get up for work at 630. Can't afford to be off at work as I'm in a new job. Wouldn't look good falling asleep at my desk or worse making a mistake! Will tape it I guess :(

Yes The Revenant wins! I have a feeling it will sweep the Oscars too.

Biggest cheer of the Night for Leo! Yes!

Yes he thanked him first said wouldn't be possible without him and other compliments :)

I'm going to watch although not doing a great job of avoiding the spoilers! Rooting for The Revenant to do well.

Darth Maul just missing the Top 10. Ooooh so close!

Yes what Froot said :)

Can I have him after you're done and save me a slice of cake?

Just heard the news. Very sad for Ben as his album is great and deserved more backing but we know how these things work by now. Hope what he says is true and we get another album.

I'm really not surprised Anakin is so low. Huge character in the story but so poorly acted by Hayden Christensen. I didn't find Jake Lloyd as offensive oddly.

This is the problem with all this, it does get silly. Where does it end? Do we stop at the Oscars? Or does this get carried into other professions as well? Will we start saying for example the NBA doesn't reflect US society because the vast majority of top players are Black Americans and there's a lack of opportunity for Asians/Whites and Hispanics? Or do we just accept as I do now that they are there because they are the best athletes? You are never going to be able to make it so every profession is shared out equally among the population and tinkering with it will just cause more resentment and division imo. Re the 12% its actually quite a small percentage. As you say if it reflected the population 1/2 nominations a year. Given that, isn't it quite understandable when there are no nominations? Its basically a 1 in 10 chance of getting nominated in a level playing field (meaning all the performances are of an equal standard - this is subjective obviously but just for sake of argument) So the chances are quite low and if there are no stand out performances, maybe this years list isn't such a surprise or in the least bit discriminatory.

Agree with everything Jonjo and Joe say. Imo it says more about the people boycotting than it does about the academy discriminating. If the first thing you think of when you look at the nominees is their colour that makes you prejudiced yourself. It should always be about the performance first. Two of my favourite actors Morgan Freeman and Denzel Washington have been nominated/won multiple awards and deserve them for great performances. If you start making everything about quotas and the colour of people's skin the achievement becomes watered down. What do you think will happen the next time a black actor wins? People will think its a token award and it will be tainted. Not fair on anyone.

Well done Empire! And Joe :) Empire was always going to win. The part where Luke meets Yoda in Dagobah was my favorite part of these films for a long time and of course the big reveal of Luke being Vader's son. We have all see it so many times now we tend to forget how great that was (well not totally :) )

This 100%. Maybe just maybe the Academy thought the nominees were the most deserving regardless of skin colour. Doesn't mean they always get it right but it also doesn't mean there are motives behind their decisions. Although I did once have the opinion Leo kept getting over looked because he was so pretty :)

I'm surprised A New Hope is lower than Jedi but as I couldn't separate them maybe other people had the same problem. After all all 3 of the original trilogy are fantastic.