You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#3471 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 490 weeks ago
Randall Flagg wrote:mitchejw wrote:If we were consistently following the EC formula...Wyoming wouldn't even have 3 EVs.
We are though. The constitution is quite clear every state has 2 senators and an amount of representatives based on population with no less than 1. If you want to start a discussion about dissolving the Senate and relying only on the House, I'll be interested in joining you. But until we amend the constitution, that is how it works.
I'm not talking about senators. EVs are based on population.
EVs are based on population through the amount of federal legislators in each state. The EV in each state is tied to how many senators and representatives they have. The amount of representatives each state has is based on their 10 year census. No state will have less than 3 and under our current system of 50 states, no state will ever exceed 391.
#3472 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 490 weeks ago
Randall Flagg wrote:misterID wrote:It would have no influence on how people in Wyoming live. Jesus Christ, that's a weak ass, scared as shit way of thinking. I have a way better argument that the people in Wyoming shouldn't be dictating the way California and everyone else lives. Yes, she should have campaigned better, as I voiced, but she still won by three million votes. *President Trump is still acting like a moron, putting together one of the worst cabinets in history. Linda McMahon is getting a cabinet position. The woman who couldn't buy a legit political seat.... TWICE. But because her husband is one of his best friends... Cronyism at its best.
Right, cause people in San Francisco aren't opining and trying to legislate laws that only effect Wyoming. Pelosi is really pushing for wolves to be introduced into downtown SF and not just by ranchers in the Rocky Mountain region.
Obama didn't just try to permanently prevent anyone from ever drilling off the Alaskan coast. (His edict won't hold up in court).
States are a thing. Wyoming's 3 EVs have no influence on Californians.
If we were consistently following the EC formula...Wyoming wouldn't even have 3 EVs.
We are though. The constitution is quite clear every state has 2 senators and an amount of representatives based on population with no less than 1. If you want to start a discussion about dissolving the Senate and relying only on the House, I'll be interested in joining you. But until we amend the constitution, that is how it works.
#3473 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 490 weeks ago
Randall Flagg wrote:mitchejw wrote:I agree with a lot of this...it's shameful that she didn't come to my home state. How dare she take it for granted. I believe this was actually her campaign managers decision. I believe I read somewhere that Bill took great exception to all of this...but wasn't influential in changing the strategy. What's more egregious is that it seems these decisions were made to obtain. Blow out.
If you believe that logic about California then I hope you remain consistent when it comes to Texas. Easier to stay to consider, while not all that seriously at times, succeeding and becoming their own country. They are big enough to be able to do that. If they are part of the union, then it shouldn't matter if they have 1000 electoral votes, if you like the electoral college you like the formula that they use to determine Vote allocation even when California participates.
If you want to pass a bill that removes humans from the EC and requires EVs to be proportional to the candidates in each state, sign me up.
I'd rather just do away with the electorate. Or get the dozen or so more states to basically neuter the whole electorate with a popular vote mandate, which will probably end up happening. Especially when this finally happens to a Republican.
Only heavily blue states have passed it and you assume it wouldn't be struck down in state or federal supreme courts. Denying the will of people in state x because states A,B and C voted a certain way isn't Democratic and certainly isn't in line with the intent behind the EC. But if states want to go that route, let them do so and we'll see what happens.
#3474 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 490 weeks ago
Randall Flagg wrote:No, I don't support it because it favors Republicans. I favor it because that's what the constitution says and I like the concept of states. Look at how skewed California is in their voting in this past election. Almost 62% of the state voted for her whereas the nation as a whole was split almost 50/50. States have their own culture and beliefs, so just because California has ballooned the past 50 years or so, doesn't mean its culture should dictate how folks in Wyoming live. California alone accounts for 10% of the EC, so it's getting its fair representation in a system that recognizes states.
And this wouldn't even have been an issue if Clinton ran a competent campaign and stepped foot in Wisconsin and spent any time in PA and Michigan outside of Philly and Detroit.
It would have no influence on how people in Wyoming live. Jesus Christ, that's a weak ass, scared as shit way of thinking. I have a way better argument that the people in Wyoming shouldn't be dictating the way California and everyone else lives. Yes, she should have campaigned better, as I voiced, but she still won by three million votes. *President Trump is still acting like a moron, putting together one of the worst cabinets in history. Linda McMahon is getting a cabinet position. The woman who couldn't buy a legit political seat.... TWICE. But because her husband is one of his best friends... Cronyism at its best.
Right, cause people in San Francisco aren't opining and trying to legislate laws that only effect Wyoming. Pelosi is really pushing for wolves to be introduced into downtown SF and not just by ranchers in the Rocky Mountain region.
Obama didn't just try to permanently prevent anyone from ever drilling off the Alaskan coast. (His edict won't hold up in court).
States are a thing. Wyoming's 3 EVs have no influence on Californians.
#3475 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 490 weeks ago
Randall Flagg wrote:Guess I'm not the only one who knows why the Democrats are suddenly against the electoral college:
Of gimme abfucking break. Bill Luffa O'Reilly. Yeah... Suddenly, as in 17 years they've been screaming against the electorate from the laser time the election was stolen from the winner. There's always a conspiracy. Some hidden agenda in the murky depths of the left... Who have no influence whatsoever. How about Republican state officials shutting down Democratic districts early on election day? Or the unfair redistricting? Old Luffa man ever talk about that?
Now Trump is literally doing pay to play. Give his sons charity a million bucks to talk to the president privately… what was he, and you guys railing about with The Clinton Foundation?
If this is true it should be immediately stopped and if any laws were broken they should be investigated. But where were you when Clinton received donations from half the people she met with as SoS? Is this a new concern or something you chose to remain silent on in the past? Or was it just you were completely unaware of it because the media wasn't interested in tarnishing the queen bee?
#3476 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 490 weeks ago
Randall Flagg wrote:No, I don't support it because it favors Republicans. I favor it because that's what the constitution says and I like the concept of states. Look at how skewed California is in their voting in this past election. Almost 62% of the state voted for her whereas the nation as a whole was split almost 50/50. States have their own culture and beliefs, so just because California has ballooned the past 50 years or so, doesn't mean its culture should dictate how folks in Wyoming live. California alone accounts for 10% of the EC, so it's getting its fair representation in a system that recognizes states.
And this wouldn't even have been an issue if Clinton ran a competent campaign and stepped foot in Wisconsin and spent any time in PA and Michigan outside of Philly and Detroit.
I agree with a lot of this...it's shameful that she didn't come to my home state. How dare she take it for granted. I believe this was actually her campaign managers decision. I believe I read somewhere that Bill took great exception to all of this...but wasn't influential in changing the strategy. What's more egregious is that it seems these decisions were made to obtain. Blow out.
If you believe that logic about California then I hope you remain consistent when it comes to Texas. Easier to stay to consider, while not all that seriously at times, succeeding and becoming their own country. They are big enough to be able to do that. If they are part of the union, then it shouldn't matter if they have 1000 electoral votes, if you like the electoral college you like the formula that they use to determine Vote allocation even when California participates.
If you want to pass a bill that removes humans from the EC and requires EVs to be proportional to the candidates in each state, sign me up.
#3477 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 490 weeks ago
No, I don't support it because it favors Republicans. I favor it because that's what the constitution says and I like the concept of states. Look at how skewed California is in their voting in this past election. Almost 62% of the state voted for her whereas the nation as a whole was split almost 50/50. States have their own culture and beliefs, so just because California has ballooned the past 50 years or so, doesn't mean its culture should dictate how folks in Wyoming live. California alone accounts for 10% of the EC, so it's getting its fair representation in a system that recognizes states.
And this wouldn't even have been an issue if Clinton ran a competent campaign and stepped foot in Wisconsin and spent any time in PA and Michigan outside of Philly and Detroit.
#3478 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 490 weeks ago
Guess I'm not the only one who knows why the Democrats are suddenly against the electoral college:
#3479 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 490 weeks ago
Only in your mind.*
#3480 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 490 weeks ago
Their votes do count. In their state as the system was designed. It's not unfair. It's not unjust. That's how the system was created. You don't even get to vote for your national leader in Europe. Is that fair? Is that Democratic?
What is hard to grasp. Look at the demographics of California in 1960 and look at it today. What's the huge power shift? How many of those hispanics migrated here legally or are the products of legal immigration? You don't think when Johnson issued an order granting citizenship to all people born on our soil, he knew it would benefit his party? The guy is on record saying with the passing of Medicaid that "every N**** will be voting Democratic for the next 100 years" and you don't think he had ulterior motives for his immigration changes. The immigration act Kennedy sponsored in the mid to late 60s completely changed the immigration demographics. We went from admitting primarily people from Europe to admitting predominately people of color from the third world. I don't have a problem with this in principle, but it's no secret ethnic minorities heavily favor democratic candidates. To say Kennedy and Democrats weren't aware of this benefit is disingenuous.
Democratic policies have directly led to a demographic change in this country that heavily favors their party. You've yet to acknowledge this. I find this legal method of influencing the electorate just as morally rehensible as gerrymandering.
And for the upteenth time, you can't make claims of how the election would be under a different set of rules. There was serious concern for a time Trump would win the popular vote and Clinton would win the electoral. No one on the left, including you, were vocal about how undemocratic that would be. Meanwhile I said then it wouldn't fucking matter because the rules of the game are the electoral college.
So either start a movement to amend the constitution or shut the fuck up about it. But thems the rules of how we elect the president and have been the same for over 200 years. And people had this same situation occur 200 years ago and the country didn't scream it was Un-Democratic and change the rules. Run a better candidate next time and show up in the states you take for granted. Also maybe run someone that caters to more than limousine liberals in NYC and SF.
