Originally posted by rogue06
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Hillary in 2020!!!
Collapse
X
-
"I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill
-
Originally posted by Chaotic Void View PostThat kind of thing is why I've heard the Electoral College exists... because otherwise, all an aspiring party has to do is pander to the Yuppies in New York and Commiefornia to win an election because that's where the Majority of folks live.
"There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to fewest objections."
At any rate, I don't think the electoral college is particularly effective at what you describe. Oh, sure, it makes it so that presidents don't "pander" to California, New York, or Texas. But that's because they're so reliable in which party they vote for. If California was a swing state you can be darn sure that winning it would be priority #1 for any president. Florida has the same number of electors as New York and it gets tons of attention in presidential elections because of its status as a swing state, as it's the largest such state.
Instead, it makes swing states paramount. So really, all the electoral college does is move the "pandering" from California/New York/Texas/Florida to Florida/Pennsylvania/Ohio/North Carolina. Presidential candidates still do a lot of pandering and focus on specific states, and I am not sure that the fact the pandering has simply been shifted is really that much of an accomplishment.
Nor do I think that a popular vote would make it so you only have to win California and New York. Together, they form 15.8% of the electoral college, and 18.2% of the population. So that's an increase, but not that much of one (admittedly, if you expunge those not eligible for voting from the populations of both states and the US as a whole, it might be a different percentage, but is probably about the same). So their importance is only slightly increased.
Of course, the original reason no longer being in effect doesn't mean some new reason might not have emerged in the meantime to warrant keeping it. But to be honest, the primary advantage I see of the electoral college is that it makes recounts much simpler, as you only have to do it for that particular state or states rather than the whole country. I am not sure that is sufficient reason to keep it.
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostAs I've said before the left has become the Boy Who Cried Wolf wrt Trump to the point that if something really big ever did surface many people will simply ignore it because of all the histrionics in the past.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostNo the reason Hillary lost the election, but NOT the popular vote, is because Putin meddled in the 2016 election with the express purpose of helping Trump and hurting Hillary's chances...as determined by US Intel Agencies and the Senate Committee.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostActually, at least according to Mueller's first indictment of some Russians (the one that blew up in his face when they showed up), they were "engaged in operations primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton" but not to the exclusive benefit of Trump since they were also trying "to support Bernie Sanders." So much for your "express purpose of helping Trump."
The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostIf Hillary didn't have so much freakin' TRUE derogatory information to transmit....
What's more, concerning these ads Facebook reported that, "the vast majority [of them] didn't specifically reference the U.S. presidential election, voting or a particular candidate."
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostActually, at least according to Mueller's first indictment of some Russians (the one that blew up in his face when they showed up), they were "engaged in operations primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton" but not to the exclusive benefit of Trump since they were also trying "to support Bernie Sanders." So much for your "express purpose of helping Trump."
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostAnd according to the indictment the Russians spent "thousands" of dollars every month for advertising on social media. According to Facebook they were spending around $100,000 on Facebook and Instagram combined -- a drop in the bucket in a presidential campaign. Further, again according to Facebook, most of the time they showed up in a person's news feed was after the election (with only 44% before the election and 56% after it) and 25% of them were seen by nobody at all.
What's more, concerning these ads Facebook reported that, "the vast majority [of them] didn't specifically reference the U.S. presidential election, voting or a particular candidate."
JimMy brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostDon't you wish now that she had won in 2016 rather than being embarrassed by having voted in a treasonous con man? No, not yet? Still got the blinders on do you?"The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy
Comment
-
Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View PostAs opposed to someone who is too dumb to know how to handle classified information and provided our enemies with tons of intel, due to incompetence?
Comment
-
Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View PostAs opposed to someone who is too dumb to know how to handle classified information and provided our enemies with tons of intel, due to incompetence?Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostHillary wasn't too dumb to know how to handle classified information. Rules are for the little people.
http://mobile.twitter.com/nydailynew...194304/photo/1Last edited by JimL; 07-17-2018, 11:27 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostShe broke a rule, she isn't a traitor like your choice. Yes, I know, you still don't get it, and I don't expect that you ever will, but you were conned and now you just can't ever admit to that. It's obvious with all of you, no matter what Trump does you will continue to defend him. Like he said, and he was right, he could shoot someone on fifth avenue in broad daylight, and you'd still remain loyal.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostDon't you wish now that she had won in 2016 rather than being embarrassed by having voted in a treasonous con man? No, not yet? Still got the blinders on do you?The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by seer, Yesterday, 11:40 AM
|
2 responses
31 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Diogenes
Yesterday, 03:28 PM
|
||
Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 06:30 AM
|
15 responses
79 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Yesterday, 04:20 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, 06-03-2024, 11:24 AM
|
25 responses
144 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cow Poke
Yesterday, 04:13 PM
|
||
Started by carpedm9587, 06-03-2024, 09:13 AM
|
43 responses
241 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 08:07 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, 06-02-2024, 09:15 AM
|
31 responses
150 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 08:12 PM
|
Comment