> On Nov 10, 2016, at 6:51 PM, Zenaan Harkness <z...@freedbms.net> wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 06:16:33PM -0300, Juan wrote: >> On Thu, 10 Nov 2016 00:30:30 -0500 >> grarpamp <grarp...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 10:43 PM, Razer <ray...@riseup.net> wrote: >>>> So the final numbers for Election Day are: >>>> >>>> 231,556,622 eligible voters >>>> >>>> 46.9% didn't vote >>>> 25.6% voted Clinton >>>> 25.5% voted Trump >>>> >>>> NOBODY got the most votes! >>> >>> I'm ok with that... means there's plenty of room >>> for someone representing and executing a different >>> arrangement of ideas to get 25.7%. >> >> >> I think the point is that "nobody" got the most votes so >> "nobody" should be president.... >> >> Also voting age is of course statist nonsense so the number of >> votes for "nobody" is even higher. > > I want to marry my rock, and my rock wants to vote, it's an assisted > rock, assisted by me, so I assist it to the voting booth, the only > slight difficulty might be proving sentience, assuming such state > ordered nonsense as "sentience" were set as the minimum bar for voting > -though if it can be tested, I can prolly write a computer program for > my robot to demonstrate sentience.
Sentience test??? That's voter disenfranchisement. Anyone dumb enough to think their vote means jack shit is barely sentient anyway.... =) > :)