[GJim]

> The real notable event is the official change of name by the US government

Correct.

Also this is a very politicised name change. Ergo, in the USA it will be embraced by supporters of the orange one, whilst everybody else in the USA will continue to call it "Gulf of Mexico".

As this was clearly done to stir up controversy, I can't think of anything more ridiculous. The job of a head of state is to unite a people, not divide them.

[pjc50]

> The job of a head of state is to unite a people, not divide them

"Head of state" is very much a job where you get to define your own mission and duties, including "sell cryptocurrency to suckers" and "sow division to exploit". Defining internal and external enemies is a very effective technique for retaining power.

[GJim]

> "Head of state" is very much a job where you get to define your own mission and duties

King Charles III, all his modern predecessors and all other European Royal heads of state would rather disagree with that statement! As would the constitutionally elected presidents of most other countries of the world. The citizenry would get rid of them if they thought otherwise. Royals included.

[jfengel]

Without meaning to Godwin the discussion, do you know what other constitutionally elected leader made it his mission to sow deep, deep, deep division within his country?

[pjc50]

> The citizenry would get rid of them if they thought otherwise.

No means of getting rid of a sitting president, other than impeachment (which isn't going to happen either) or, you know, the other one.

[nailer]

> Ergo, in the USA it will be embraced by supporters of the orange one, whilst everybody else in the USA will continue to call it "Gulf of Mexico".

Most Americans support ‘the orange one’. There was a poll conducted on this quite recently.

[viciousvoxel]

This is actually not true: just under 50% of votes went to GOP. Additionally, only 64% of the voting-eligible population voted, so it was more like 32% of the adult population voting GOP. "Everybody else" represents a larger population.

[nailer]

Asides from the GOP winning the popular vote, you seem to be counting people that didn’t vote as opposition rather than nulls.

[oneeyedpigeon]

[According to Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidentia...), the parent is correct: Trump won 49.8% of the vote.

[jfengel]

It's close enough to "most" that I think it's worth rounding up in most conversational contexts.

This isn't some minority view committing a coup. This is a pretty-damn-near majority using the electoral process to give itself a thumb on the scale to win.

It may not be "what America really is", but it's also not not who America really is. It's fair to say that this is who the world should continue to expect us to be, and that we'll continue to think that this is a democratic country. (Not just that 49.8%, but a large majority, even most of those who oppose the present government.)

[viciousvoxel]

I disagree that it is close enough to "most". When I read/hear "most" in conversation I think a super-majority. Even if it was a simple majority at 51% I'd think using "most" is a bit pedantic but I wouldn't argue the usage.

I completely agree with your later points -- my point was that that is not only who we are, and Trump winning doesn't mean everyone else now has to hold their tongues.

[nailer]

You may or may not be right but don’t cite wikipedia. Wikipedia themselves tell you not to do this.

My point re: most Americans voted for the President is Trump winning the popular vote. Which is shown on Wikipedia, but I’m not going to cite it. :)

[viciousvoxel]

No, GOP is the party that received the most votes but most Americans did not vote GOP. The way you are using "most" implies a win by majority but this did not occur (49.8% < 50%); Trump did win the popular vote but it was a plurality.

[danaris]

That appears to be moving the goal posts.

In your grandparent post, you simply stated that more than half the country support Trump; viciousvoxel was refuting that by pointing out that less than half the country voted for him.

How many actively opposed him is immaterial to your initial statement.

[gatlin]

What they meant through the imprecision of their language was that an election was conducted and he won by the rules of the contest, and now as the winner he is exercising authority commensurate with his new position.

[nailer]

More than half of voters that voted for Democrat or Republican voted for Trump.

Maybe my language was imprecise, I could agree with you there, but I don’t think the other people matter.