“We should elect the president the way we elect governors, senators, mayors, represen

BartenderElite said:
That's always it - "Well, the Dem President did okay - because of REPUBLICANS."

Nah. The economic plan that Clinton passed early in his admin - which had very little GOP support, and was ridiculed by Republicans - laid the groundwork for the incredible prosperity that followed. The history is clear.
Click to expand...

In this case, yes. Clinton early on tried a pretty Leftist agenda then had Congress flip from Democrat to Republican in a massive red wave two years into his first term. Clinton was politically savvy and smart enough to know which side his bread was buttered on and reversed course to a centrist agenda and was able to work with that Republican congress for six years resulting in those outcomes.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
In this case, yes. Clinton early on tried a pretty Leftist agenda then had Congress flip from Democrat to Republican in a massive red wave two years into his first term. Clinton was politically savvy and smart enough to know which side his bread was buttered on and reversed course to a centrist agenda and was able to work with that Republican congress for six years resulting in those outcomes.
Click to expand...

Too bad the GOP is pushing a neo-fascist agenda.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
In this case, yes. Clinton early on tried a pretty Leftist agenda then had Congress flip from Democrat to Republican in a massive red wave two years into his first term. Clinton was politically savvy and smart enough to know which side his bread was buttered on and reversed course to a centrist agenda and was able to work with that Republican congress for six years resulting in those outcomes.
Click to expand...

Clinton focused on what he believed was possible to accomplish.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
That's just a sophomoric dodge. If Americans in rural areas don't count for all intents, they aren't being represented. If a president is only beholden to those in dense urban areas, the rest don't count. It isn't just the states that get screwed, it's people living in low density rural areas as well. You are arguing that those who count live in high rise apartments in places like NYC and those that live in somewhere like Podunk Idaho don't.
Click to expand...

You got it bassackwards, boy. The electoral college is the system that disenfranchises voters. Look at the Republican voters in NY or California. When is the last time their vote counted? If California goes Dem with 51% of the vote, that's 49% of Republicans who don't count for all extents. That's millions of voters.
In a popular vote, everybody's vote counts the same whether you live in urban or rural areas.
Got nothing to do with low density Podunk, Idaho. Their vote counts just as much as those in NYC.

Your argument is lame and doesn't hold water.
 
Joe Capitalist said:
You got it bassackwards, boy. The electoral college is the system that disenfranchises voters. Look at the Republican voters in NY or California. When is the last time their vote counted? If California goes Dem with 51% of the vote, that's 49% of Republicans who don't count for all extents. That's millions of voters.
In a popular vote, everybody's vote counts the same whether you live in urban or rural areas.
Got nothing to do with low density Podunk, Idaho. Their vote counts just as much as those in NYC.

Your argument is lame and doesn't hold water.
Click to expand...

Okay, let's have it your way and make it so state vote counts aren't winner take all for all elections as they are now. That means the split in most elections is almost 50-50 and the Democrats get fucked at the state level. Fine with me so long as the Left doesn't win because the Left fucks everything they touch up.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Okay, let's have it your way and make it so state vote counts aren't winner take all for all elections as they are now. That means the split in most elections is almost 50-50 and the Democrats get fucked at the state level. Fine with me so long as the Left doesn't win because the Left fucks everything they touch up.
Click to expand...

What the hell are you garbling, boy? Let me give you some irrefutable facts.
In the last 30 years of presidential elections, The Republicans have won the popular vote ONCE.
It's YOUR side that gets fucked.

Your surrender is accepted.
 
Joe Capitalist said:
What the hell are you garbling, boy? Let me give you some irrefutable facts.
In the last 30 years of presidential elections, The Republicans have won the popular vote ONCE.
It's YOUR side that gets fucked.

Your surrender is accepted.
Click to expand...

The current system allocates electoral votes on a winner take all basis. If that weren't the case, and they were allocated on the basis of who won the vote in each electoral voting district, then the Democrats would never win a presidential election. The Democrats only win the popular vote on the basis of large urban areas with high population density, something I already pointed out and that is unfair and unequal to the other roughly 80% of US geographic territory where population densities are low.

You just want things your way to establish a permanent dictatorship of the Left.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
The current system allocates electoral votes on a winner take all basis. If that weren't the case, and they were allocated on the basis of who won the vote in each electoral voting district, then the Democrats would never win a presidential election. The Democrats only win the popular vote on the basis of large urban areas with high population density, something I already pointed out and that is unfair and unequal to the other roughly 80% of US geographic territory where population densities are low.

You just want things your way to establish a permanent dictatorship of the Left.
Click to expand...

It's not unfair. People in rural areas shouldn't have their vote count MORE than those in urban areas.

Rural areas get their vote, and they already get very disproportionate representation in the Senate. If anything is "unequal," it's the electoral college.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Hardly. Obama continued numerous quasi-wars in the middle East and became infamous for his use of cruise missiles on "terrorist" targets. Clinton had Kosovo and then the debacle in Somalia (aka Blackhawk Down), as well as being infamous for "drive-by" cruise missile attacks on various targets.

As for balancing the budget, that was a combination of a Republican congress and a major drawdown due to the collapse of the Soviet Union and end of the Cold War by Reagan. Clinton was savvy enough to go along rather than move the money saved into new spending. His going along with Republican led reductions in endless welfare programs (eg., work-fare) also helped.

You really have no understanding of history...
Click to expand...

LOL. Right. What I don't have is YOUR Democrat-hating understanding of history.
 
LurchAddams said:
Hey, man. Glad to see you posting. How are you doing in that weather? Aren't you in the thick of it?
Click to expand...
I'm good. We have the 4 degree nights, but the massive snow is up north near the Great Lakes. Every time the temp dips, they get lake effects snow.

Now that there's an actual storm, they have 4 ft. of snow. You have to be nuts to spend winters there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top