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

[Into the Night]

They absolutely do. And less populous states also have disproportionate representation in the Senate.

Votes get counted - but they don't count if a voter is in the minority in a given state.

Because of election fraud by Democrats.

 

[Into the Night]

That's the flaw with the Electoral College. California and NY typically vote Democratic so all of their Electoral votes go to the Dem Candidate.
Thus, all the Republicans in those two states are disenfranchised. Their vote is irrelevant. That's millions of votes that have zero representation.
I'd like to know why that is fair because I and many others think it's very unfair.

There are no votes in oligarchies and dictatorships. Elections there are just a sham.

 

[Into the Night]

Disenfranchised? No, they are in a small minority. Why should their views have as much power as the vast majority does? If you think the smaller party should have equal power, explain why. Then explain why Greens and Libertarians should not have that power too.

Disenfranchised. Elections in the SOTNY and the SODC are a sham.

 

[Into the Night]

The republicans in those states votes count. They just got out voted. Elections have consequences. If they don't like it they should move. Lots of Californians and New Yorkers do just that. Texas and Florida welcome them.

They 'voted', true. Unfortunately, elections are just a sham in dictatorships like the SODC (formerly California) and in oligarchies like the SOTNY (formerly New York).

 

[Nordberg]

False, that is not representative of the nation as a whole if most of the population lives in 3 states, why do you hate your country and the principles that make if great? Fucking traitor

It is absolutely representative of the majority of Americans. That is what democracy is all about. Do want to make a definition of how rural an area must be to get special voting powers? Do people living way out of cities get double votes? Would that be fair to you? What you are advocating is un-American and wrong.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

That is true of all elections. If a candidate for governor wins by 51% to 49% those votes for the minority don't count according to your reasoning. It is winner-take-all.

This is the inherent problem with having only two viable political parties.
When one of them has a majority, we have for all intents and purposes a one party system.

If we got rid of the "big tent" parties and had lots of smaller "special interest" parties
which truly reflected the interests of their memberships instead, we'd be much better off.

No majorities. All legislation would require cross party support to make it to the president's desk.
Serious discussion across party lines would be necessary always, and thus only legislation that was amenable across interests groups would get passed.

That would also put an end to the presidents being elected at the polls rather than chosen by the House of Representatives because no candidate would
ever get 270 electoral votes. Unless we went to a popular vote which would make us a totally different country; but that may be what we need to be.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

False, that is not representative of the nation as a whole if most of the population lives in 3 states, why do you hate your country and the principles that make if great? Fucking traitor

You very obviously don't know what the word "traitor" means.

Betraying one's country to a foreign entity is the only thing than can make one a traitor.
Even sedition, as practiced by trumpanzees, isn't treason. You get ten years, not a lethal injection.

Disagreeing with the provisions of the constitution is a totally acceptable thing for any citizen to do, as long as one doesn't try to change anything by non-legal means when legal means exist.
[That would be sedition.]

Tell me...how can you possibly be so stupid? Why do you post on the world wide web to let everybody know?
I don't think that you're even smart enough to experience shame.

 

[Nordberg]

The Senate represents the States, idiot. Every State has two senators.

So you aren't aware that states have different populations and different numbers of voters? Wyoming has 2 senators and a population of 580,000 people. California has 2 senators and nearly 40 million voters. Are you too stupid to understand how wrong that is? The same power in the senate while representing far, far fewer people. The 50-50 senate skews the power into rural states even though they have a much smaller number of voters.

 

[Nordberg]

Yes. Senators should be chosen by State legislatures, not popular vote in each State. Representing the States is the purpose of the Senate.

So rewarding gerrymandering. That figures. Why doesn't the president just install them?

 

[evince]

The state


That refers to the people not the land you shitty Russian disinformation bot

 

[Dutch Uncle]

You don't believe in evolution.

Grey wolves physically evolve into dogs with only thirty generations of getting food and veterinary care from humans.
The front of the skull expands to make room for a larger cerebrum and thus classification as a dog.

I don't pretend that humans are remotely as good as dogs, but they do evolve.
The US was a brand new idea. That idea fell flat on its ass, obviously, but it was new.

History always has included new ideas.

Wrong again, neef, but then that's the expected reply of someone who built a house on Mount Stupid.

What about Sheep Dogs, Neef? Grey wolves still exist independently. Sheep dogs were shaped by humans. Your rational is flawed.

How did your partition plans work with Northern Ireland? South Vietnam? The Korean Peninsula? Do you have any success stories for this "theory" you're so willing to bet the future of every American upon?

Dude, the idea of the US evolved from ideas of people ranging from Jesus to John Locke, but making it work is different. On of my favorite shows was on PBS: "Connections" with James Burke. He showed how technology is connected to human advancements in the past and how it affects our modern society. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078588/ An example is how a clock requires knowledge of math, metallurgy and understanding the Universe is predictable. Both history and the present prove your theory of partition won't work at present. It'd be self-defeating.

Partitioning isn't a new idea, neef. Explaining how it could work could be interesting, but given human nature, I'm not seeing it.

https://www.ascpsychological.com/blog/mount-stupid/

When discussing coronavirus, the same people express their view with the highest level of confidence in their righteousness, often arrogantly and defiantly, and with intense fervor towards those who question or oppose their view. We can find the same dynamic occurring in people who are set in their convictions about guns and gun laws, abortions laws, foreigners and “illegals”, minorities, Democrats or Republicans, welfare laws and people who do not work, the rich and their privileges, and on and on.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

duplicate

 

[Joe Capitalist]

Disenfranchised? No, they are in a small minority. Why should their views have as much power as the vast majority does? If you think the smaller party should have equal power, explain why. Then explain why Greens and Libertarians should not have that power too.

Not sure you understood my point.

In an election based on popular vote (not Electoral Votes) votes in all states are tallied to a total to determine a winner. Thus, ALL votes (Dem & Rep votes) in California and NY (typically Dem states) would be tallied to final count of all states such that the Dem and Rep candidates would receive the voter tally in all states, not just the states they won. In an election with an Electoral College, ALL Electoral votes would go to the candidate that won the state and NONE would go to the candidate who lost the state to determine a winner.
The way it is now with the Electoral College, a candidate can win by only carrying 12 states (less than 25% of states).

See the difference now?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Moron. Jarod spoke for himself.

Disagreed on both points.

That aside, do you think you win anything if you blast a thread with 10-15 glib responses and no one replies, Sybil? Does it give you a sense of self-satisfaction that, since no one replied, you must be "king of the hill"? The "Winner"?

 

[NiftyNiblick]

Wrong again, neef, but then that's the expected reply of someone who built a house on Mount Stupid.

What about Sheep Dogs, Neef? Grey wolves still exist independently. Sheep dogs were shaped by humans. Your rational is flawed.

How did your partition plans work with Northern Ireland? South Vietnam? The Korean Peninsula? Do you have any success stories for this "theory" you're so willing to bet the future of every American upon?

Dude, the idea of the US evolved from ideas of people ranging from Jesus to John Locke, but making it work is different. On of my favorite shows was on PBS: "Connections" with James Burke. He showed how technology is connected to human advancements in the past and how it affects our modern society. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078588/ An example is how a clock requires knowledge of math, metallurgy and understanding the Universe is predictable. Both history and the present prove your theory of partition won't work at present. It'd be self-defeating.

Partitioning isn't a new idea, neef. Explaining how it could work could be interesting, but given human nature, I'm not seeing it.

https://www.ascpsychological.com/blog/mount-stupid/

Do you have comprehension problems, oom?

Of course grey wolves exist independently and sheep dogs were shaped by humans.

Nothing I said came anywhere close to disputing that. That, in fact, is pretty much confirmed by what I said.

As for those nations that partitioned under belligerent circumstances rather than a mutually agreed upon plan,
that is EXACTLY why I said it was time to try something unprecedented.

Do you view existence as a timeless loop where nothing was ever unprecedented, or do you agree that in certain points along the timeline of our species' history,
humanity tried something new now and again?

 

[Joe Capitalist]

That is true of all elections. If a candidate for governor wins by 51% to 49% those votes for the minority don't count according to your reasoning. It is winner-take-all.

But if a candidate for president won every state by 51% to 49%, he/she would win 100% of the electoral votes. Do you think that's a good representation of the people's choice?
Methinks any system that would designate the candidate who didn't get the majority of votes to win is flawed.

 

[Stringfellow Hawk]

It is absolutely representative of the majority of Americans. That is what democracy is all about. Do want to make a definition of how rural an area must be to get special voting powers? Do people living way out of cities get double votes? Would that be fair to you? What you are advocating is un-American and wrong.

it is totally American, go back to school jr, your teachers failed in teaching you. The majority of California is illegal aliens with voting rights outside the constitution. Maybe you get your way, there is a war, the ones without firearms will lose badly

 

[Stringfellow Hawk]

You very obviously don't know what the word "traitor" means.

Betraying one's country to a foreign entity is the only thing than can make one a traitor.
Even sedition, as practiced by trumpanzees, isn't treason. You get ten years, not a lethal injection.

Disagreeing with the provisions of the constitution is a totally acceptable thing for any citizen to do, as long as one doesn't try to change anything by non-legal means when legal means exist.
[That would be sedition.]

Tell me...how can you possibly be so stupid? Why do you post on the world wide web to let everybody know?
I don't think that you're even smart enough to experience shame.

You are promoting illegal aliens vote in our elections, by your definition you are a traitor

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Do you have comprehension problems, oom?...

...As for those nations that partitioned under belligerent circumstances rather than a mutually agreed upon plan,

No, but if you can't explain it, why do you think the problem is my comprehension, neef?

Name single national partition that was 100% amicable, neef. I'll wait so we can discuss it.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

You are promoting illegal aliens vote in our elections, by your definition you are a traitor

Ah, but the refugees to whom you refer as illegal aliens are not representing the governments that they're fleeing.
Again, no treason applies.

One mustn't engaged in a battle of wits while unarmed.
I'm very sorry that they did away with the Saturday morning cartoons, thus depriving your mind from grasping something it understands.

I guess you need to be on "ignore" for a while.