To those that advocate for a popular vote

AnomanderRake wrote:That argument goes both ways Goose.

Anyway like I said I fully support 1 vote = 1 vote regardless of state. It's mind boggling to me that anyone actually believes their vote should be worth more than another citizen's.

This continues to be a point worthy of further discussion.

If the principle of one person one equally weighted vote is nullified by the electoral college, does the electoral college itself deny equal protection under the law?

More specifically, do states that distribute electoral college votes based on a winner-take-all formula, which is what drives the nullification of one person one equally weighted vote, violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment? That would be 48 of 50 states.

The_Dude wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:I'm surprised to hear that you're into political correctness.

Being PC and insulting people with unbridled arrogance for having different views are different things.

We on the right can only hope you continue to not understand--it will ensure Democrats continue to be historically weak for years to come.  Its like the gift that keeps on giving.  The more the left doubles down on identity politics and policies the American people rejected, the more irrelevant they become.  Its awesome to see the complete and utter breakdown of the Democratic party.

I'm sorry that your snowflake feelings are hurt....

maybe this will make you feel better.

The_Dude wrote:

DWags wrote:

I'd vote for allowing the majority to control then. But that's just me.

How come you and the left only complain about the election process once you lose?

First, I'll break my rule and talk to you, even though you are one of the biggest pieces of racist trash we have on here, just once.  I know you and X have a hard time following the thread, you're both as narrow minded as I've read here.  However, my answer to X, which I didn't even bother explaining followed the line of "who should we be held hostage to", not the electoral college process, not the majority of voters vs. the constitutional rules of election, but the specific question "Who should we be held hostage to".  More specifically, if you're going to say "someone is getting controlled" one way or the other I thought it would be humorous to say "I'd then settle for the majority".       X being X, didn't quite understand that, and it just wasn't worth a retort, I really don't think he could understand that.\.  You, being the racist idiot you are, can't piece it together either, because you've always been short sighted and idiotic.   

But in the debate over the electoral college, I am the one who giggles at those who say we should change this or that about the process, like there's even a possibility.  These debates are as smart as those people who call into sports talk and say "lets trade Martinez and a minor league picture for Bryce Harper"  Finally, I didn't lose this election, and only a short sighted racist like yourself would think that.   How did I lose an election?   I am a voter who has never been dumb enough to just vote a straight party ticket.  I laugh at those who do.  Especially now.  My First responder friends who did that are now sending representatives to Lansign to protest the Devos family doing away with their pensions.  (I just got word from a friend who is a budget director up there just told me the senate is now backing off the teacher pension thing till next year) It's tragic for the first responders who voted straight republican, walked out of the voting booth electing a man on rhetoric of building a wall/fence and law and order, but also electing Devos puppets.   It's funny, but tragic.  

Yeah, I didn't vote for trump.  I have a wife and two daughters.  I wouldn't do that.   But I didn't "lose" an election.  Many people I voted for won, some lost.  I also went out of the booth knowing that I wasn't stupid enough to vote straight party, I never have been.  Those elections I didn't have time to research I just left blank.  You're an idiot.  If I"m rude to you, so be it, it's not a polite society anymore is it?  It's kind of a grab em by the pussy type society now.   And frankly, you have a huge pussy thats pretty easy to grab.

DWags wrote:

The_Dude wrote:

How come you and the left only complain about the election process once you lose?

First, I'll break my rule and talk to you, even though you are one of the biggest pieces of racist trash we have on here, just once.  I know you and X have a hard time following the thread, you're both as narrow minded as I've read here.  However, my answer to X, which I didn't even bother explaining followed the line of "who should we be held hostage to", not the electoral college process, not the majority of voters vs. the constitutional rules of election, but the specific question "Who should we be held hostage to".  More specifically, if you're going to say "someone is getting controlled" one way or the other I thought it would be humorous to say "I'd then settle for the majority".       X being X, didn't quite understand that, and it just wasn't worth a retort, I really don't think he could understand that.\.  You, being the racist idiot you are, can't piece it together either, because you've always been short sighted and idiotic.   

But in the debate over the electoral college, I am the one who giggles at those who say we should change this or that about the process, like there's even a possibility.  These debates are as smart as those people who call into sports talk and say "lets trade Martinez and a minor league picture for Bryce Harper"  Finally, I didn't lose this election, and only a short sighted racist like yourself would think that.   How did I lose an election?   I am a voter who has never been dumb enough to just vote a straight party ticket.  I laugh at those who do.  Especially now.  My First responder friends who did that are now sending representatives to Lansign to protest the Devos family doing away with their pensions.  (I just got word from a friend who is a budget director up there just told me the senate is now backing off the teacher pension thing till next year) It's tragic for the first responders who voted straight republican, walked out of the voting booth electing a man on rhetoric of building a wall/fence and law and order, but also electing Devos puppets.   It's funny, but tragic.  

Yeah, I didn't vote for trump.  I have a wife and two daughters.  I wouldn't do that.   But I didn't "lose" an election.  Many people I voted for won, some lost.  I also went out of the booth knowing that I wasn't stupid enough to vote straight party, I never have been.  Those elections I didn't have time to research I just left blank.  You're an idiot.  If I"m rude to you, so be it, it's not a polite society anymore is it?  It's kind of a grab em by the pussy type society now.   And frankly, you have a huge pussy thats pretty easy to grab.

it's funny how the same big, tough people who belittle those who need a "safe space" are now so easily offended when someone speaks the truth to them, isn't it?

Turtleneck wrote:

AnomanderRake wrote:That argument goes both ways Goose.

Anyway like I said I fully support 1 vote = 1 vote regardless of state. It's mind boggling to me that anyone actually believes their vote should be worth more than another citizen's.

This continues to be a point worthy of further discussion.

If the principle of one person one equally weighted vote is nullified by the electoral college, does the electoral college itself deny equal protection under the law?

More specifically, do states that distribute electoral college votes based on a winner-take-all formula, which is what drives the nullification of one person one equally weighted vote, violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment? That would be 48 of 50 states.

Now all of a sudden every democrat is a Constitutional scholar?

I love how you consistently dig up or come upon articles on why urban voters are bad because they vote for Democrats and all those folks who were either born in rural areas and stayed or made their living in the more densely populated areas and retired to rural areas should make all of us have a collective sigh of relief because they saved us from a Clinton Presidency.

My rural neighbors have called me elitist because I went to MSU and both my kids went to Big Ten universities and were in the Honors College at Iowa and MSU (The found out through their kid's Facebook accounts). They are the defenders of freedom until there is a recount or while they justified why an 9-7-6 member SCOTUS was acceptable if Clinton won but now we need 9 as soon as President Trump can nominate one. So yes Bumpkins. Call me an elitist because my kids aren't goin' to work out of HS then they are bumpkins.

Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump.   

My life has been changed way more by local politicians than any of the above have ever done.   Way more, and not even close.  

So, build a wall, turn your thermostat down to 67 and wear a sweater (only goose and GRR will remember that) Say the pledge of allegiance in a class room, or defend the golf of tonkin, it's pretty funny actually.

DWags wrote:

The_Dude wrote:

How come you and the left only complain about the election process once you lose?

First, I'll break my rule and talk to you, even though you are one of the biggest pieces of racist trash we have on here, just once.  I know you and X have a hard time following the thread, you're both as narrow minded as I've read here.  However, my answer to X, which I didn't even bother explaining followed the line of "who should we be held hostage to", not the electoral college process, not the majority of voters vs. the constitutional rules of election, but the specific question "Who should we be held hostage to".  More specifically, if you're going to say "someone is getting controlled" one way or the other I thought it would be humorous to say "I'd then settle for the majority".       X being X, didn't quite understand that, and it just wasn't worth a retort, I really don't think he could understand that.\.  You, being the racist idiot you are, can't piece it together either, because you've always been short sighted and idiotic.   

But in the debate over the electoral college, I am the one who giggles at those who say we should change this or that about the process, like there's even a possibility.  These debates are as smart as those people who call into sports talk and say "lets trade Martinez and a minor league picture for Bryce Harper"  Finally, I didn't lose this election, and only a short sighted racist like yourself would think that.   How did I lose an election?   I am a voter who has never been dumb enough to just vote a straight party ticket.  I laugh at those who do.  Especially now.  My First responder friends who did that are now sending representatives to Lansign to protest the Devos family doing away with their pensions.  (I just got word from a friend who is a budget director up there just told me the senate is now backing off the teacher pension thing till next year) It's tragic for the first responders who voted straight republican, walked out of the voting booth electing a man on rhetoric of building a wall/fence and law and order, but also electing Devos puppets.   It's funny, but tragic.  

Yeah, I didn't vote for trump.  I have a wife and two daughters.  I wouldn't do that.   But I didn't "lose" an election.  Many people I voted for won, some lost.  I also went out of the booth knowing that I wasn't stupid enough to vote straight party, I never have been.  Those elections I didn't have time to research I just left blank.  You're an idiot.  If I"m rude to you, so be it, it's not a polite society anymore is it?  It's kind of a grab em by the pussy type society now.   And frankly, you have a huge pussy thats pretty easy to grab.

If I recorded you for the past 30 years of your life, I am sure you never, ever, had made objectifying comments about a woman. Right? RIGHT? Because if you did, well, that makes you a massive hypocrite.

Your life wont change. Your daughters lives wont change. If anything, they will have a brighter future.

We have a president that isnt a political ideologue. Best possible scenario.

DWags wrote:Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump.   

My life has been changed way more by local politicians than any of the above have ever done.   Way more, and not even close.  

So, build a wall, turn your thermostat down to 67 and wear a sweater (only goose and GRR will remember that) Say the pledge of allegiance in a class room, or defend the golf of tonkin, it's pretty funny actually.

Exactly, so why all the hysteria from the left?

I think I know why...they are the biggest cry baby whiners in history. And it makes sense. Obama is the biggest cry baby whiner president in the history of our country.

GRR Spartan wrote:I love how you consistently dig up or come upon articles on why urban voters are bad because they vote for Democrats and all those folks who were either born in rural areas and stayed or made their living in the more densely populated areas and retired to rural areas should make all of us have a collective sigh of relief because  they saved us from a Clinton Presidency.

My rural neighbors have called me elitist because I went to MSU and both my kids went to Big Ten universities and were in the Honors College at Iowa and MSU (The found out through their kid's Facebook accounts). They are the defenders of freedom until there is a recount or while they justified why an 9-7-6 member SCOTUS was acceptable if Clinton won but now we need 9 as soon as President Trump can nominate one.  So yes Bumpkins.  Call me an elitist because my kids aren't goin' to work out of HS then they are bumpkins.

I dont really give a shit about personal anecdotes.

And the media and left has streotyped and painted with a broad brush everyone on the right for YEARs.  Finally American have had enough and are pushing back.

Classic case of the left being able to dish it but cant take it.  And thats why Trump and the right arent showing the left respect.  Because you deserve none when you bully others but cant take your own medicine.

The lft hates bullying...unless its the bullying of a conservative. The left hates stereotyping and name calling...unless its someone whos a conservative. The left is all about minorities and women...unless that minority or a woman is a conservative.

Democrats became a party of exclusiveness instead of inclusiveness, and can only offer up attacks instead of policies people want.

Chuck Schumer the other day gave a grandstanding speech about how the Repubs are waging a war against seniors. He still doesnt get it--Americans are tired of hacks like him offering up attacks but no ideas or solutions or substance.

The_Dude wrote:

GRR Spartan wrote:I love how you consistently dig up or come upon articles on why urban voters are bad because they vote for Democrats and all those folks who were either born in rural areas and stayed or made their living in the more densely populated areas and retired to rural areas should make all of us have a collective sigh of relief because  they saved us from a Clinton Presidency.

My rural neighbors have called me elitist because I went to MSU and both my kids went to Big Ten universities and were in the Honors College at Iowa and MSU (The found out through their kid's Facebook accounts). They are the defenders of freedom until there is a recount or while they justified why an 9-7-6 member SCOTUS was acceptable if Clinton won but now we need 9 as soon as President Trump can nominate one.  So yes Bumpkins.  Call me an elitist because my kids aren't goin' to work out of HS then they are bumpkins.

I dont really give a shit about personal anecdotes.

And the media and left has streotyped and painted with a broad brush everyone on the right for YEARs.  Finally American have had enough and are pushing back.

Classic case of the left being able to dish it but cant take it.  And thats why Trump and the right arent showing the left respect.  Because you deserve non when you bully others but cant take your own medicine.

Want to appear normal to the average American again? Stop writing articles about Trump being Hitler.  Or keep doing so.

not at all surprised that you don't understand the irony of your own words..

not at all surprised that you are asking for a safe space protecting you from free speech.

 

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

The_Dude wrote:

I dont really give a shit about personal anecdotes.

And the media and left has streotyped and painted with a broad brush everyone on the right for YEARs. Finally American have had enough and are pushing back.

Classic case of the left being able to dish it but cant take it. And thats why Trump and the right arent showing the left respect. Because you deserve non when you bully others but cant take your own medicine.

Want to appear normal to the average American again? Stop writing articles about Trump being Hitler. Or keep doing so.

Personally, I want the NYT and WaPo to write front page Trump is Hitler articles everyday. I cant get enough.

But if you want average Americans to not run away from your party in horror, you should stop. (but selfishly I want it to continue...watching the Dems self-destruct is a great joy of mine.)

Its like here is the blue print for the Dems to try and win elections again...and they are doing everything opposite of what needs to be done. Its glorious.

The_Dude wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:  

Personally, I want the NYT and WaPo to write front page Trump is Hitler articles everyday.  I cant get enough.

if you ever managed to stop whining about it, I'd believe you.

The_Dude wrote:

DWags wrote:


First, I'll break my rule and talk to you, even though you are one of the biggest pieces of racist trash we have on here, just once.  I know you and X have a hard time following the thread, you're both as narrow minded as I've read here.  However, my answer to X, which I didn't even bother explaining followed the line of "who should we be held hostage to", not the electoral college process, not the majority of voters vs. the constitutional rules of election, but the specific question "Who should we be held hostage to".  More specifically, if you're going to say "someone is getting controlled" one way or the other I thought it would be humorous to say "I'd then settle for the majority".       X being X, didn't quite understand that, and it just wasn't worth a retort, I really don't think he could understand that.\.  You, being the racist idiot you are, can't piece it together either, because you've always been short sighted and idiotic.   

But in the debate over the electoral college, I am the one who giggles at those who say we should change this or that about the process, like there's even a possibility.  These debates are as smart as those people who call into sports talk and say "lets trade Martinez and a minor league picture for Bryce Harper"  Finally, I didn't lose this election, and only a short sighted racist like yourself would think that.   How did I lose an election?   I am a voter who has never been dumb enough to just vote a straight party ticket.  I laugh at those who do.  Especially now.  My First responder friends who did that are now sending representatives to Lansign to protest the Devos family doing away with their pensions.  (I just got word from a friend who is a budget director up there just told me the senate is now backing off the teacher pension thing till next year) It's tragic for the first responders who voted straight republican, walked out of the voting booth electing a man on rhetoric of building a wall/fence and law and order, but also electing Devos puppets.   It's funny, but tragic.  

Yeah, I didn't vote for trump.  I have a wife and two daughters.  I wouldn't do that.   But I didn't "lose" an election.  Many people I voted for won, some lost.  I also went out of the booth knowing that I wasn't stupid enough to vote straight party, I never have been.  Those elections I didn't have time to research I just left blank.  You're an idiot.  If I"m rude to you, so be it, it's not a polite society anymore is it?  It's kind of a grab em by the pussy type society now.   And frankly, you have a huge pussy thats pretty easy to grab.

If I recorded you for the past 30 years of your life, I am sure you never, ever, had made objectifying comments about a woman.  Right?  RIGHT?  Because if you did, well, that makes you a massive hypocrite.

Your life wont change.  Your daughters lives wont change.  If anything, they will have a brighter future.  

We have a president that isnt a political ideologue.  Best possible scenario.

You'd also find that I never grabbed one by the pussy.   The fact you can't wrap your head around that doesn't surprise me, the fact that you would compare saying a girl is good looking or hot, to someone who assaults a girl is even less surprising.   Convince yourself that everyone is a misogynistic racist pervert like yourself and the president elect.  It makes things easier for you I'm sure.

The_Dude wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

This continues to be a point worthy of further discussion.

If the principle of one person one equally weighted vote is nullified by the electoral college, does the electoral college itself deny equal protection under the law?

More specifically, do states that distribute electoral college votes based on a winner-take-all formula, which is what drives the nullification of one person one equally weighted vote, violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment? That would be 48 of 50 states.

Now all of a sudden every democrat is a Constitutional scholar?

I am not a Democrat nor am I sorry my posts are too complex for you. Have you thought about checking out tBob? I think that is more your pace.

DWags wrote:

The_Dude wrote:

If I recorded you for the past 30 years of your life, I am sure you never, ever, had made objectifying comments about a woman.  Right?  RIGHT?  Because if you did, well, that makes you a massive hypocrite.

Your life wont change.  Your daughters lives wont change.  If anything, they will have a brighter future.  

We have a president that isnt a political ideologue.  Best possible scenario.

You'd also find that I never grabbed one by the pussy.   The fact you can't wrap your head around that doesn't surprise me, the fact that you would compare saying a girl is good looking or hot, to someone who assaults a girl is even less surprising.   Convince yourself that everyone is a misogynistic racist pervert like yourself and the president elect.  It makes things easier for you I'm sure.

your going to hurt his fragile snowflake feelings.

The_Dude wrote:

GRR Spartan wrote:I love how you consistently dig up or come upon articles on why urban voters are bad because they vote for Democrats and all those folks who were either born in rural areas and stayed or made their living in the more densely populated areas and retired to rural areas should make all of us have a collective sigh of relief because  they saved us from a Clinton Presidency.

My rural neighbors have called me elitist because I went to MSU and both my kids went to Big Ten universities and were in the Honors College at Iowa and MSU (The found out through their kid's Facebook accounts). They are the defenders of freedom until there is a recount or while they justified why an 9-7-6 member SCOTUS was acceptable if Clinton won but now we need 9 as soon as President Trump can nominate one.  So yes Bumpkins.  Call me an elitist because my kids aren't goin' to work out of HS then they are bumpkins.

I dont really give a shit about personal anecdotes.

And the media and left has streotyped and painted with a broad brush everyone on the right for YEARs.  Finally American have had enough and are pushing back.

Classic case of the left being able to dish it but cant take it.  And thats why Trump and the right arent showing the left respect.  Because you deserve none when you bully others but cant take your own medicine.

The lft hates bullying...unless its the bullying of a conservative. The left hates stereotyping and name calling...unless its someone whos a conservative. The left is all about minorities and women...unless that minority or a woman is a conservative.

Democrats became a party of exclusiveness instead of inclusiveness, and can only offer up attacks instead of policies people want.

Chuck Schumer the other day gave a grandstanding speech about how the Repubs are waging a war against seniors. He still doesnt get it--Americans are tired of hacks like him offering up attacks but no ideas or solutions or substance.

Pushing back by voting in Trump LOL. All you guys did was elevate the billionaire class. The establishment is quaking in their boots over you guys. They wanted me to pass along a message to you, thank you for your vote.

Hey, you got conned Dude!

steveschneider wrote:

The_Dude wrote:

I dont really give a shit about personal anecdotes.

And the media and left has streotyped and painted with a broad brush everyone on the right for YEARs.  Finally American have had enough and are pushing back.

Classic case of the left being able to dish it but cant take it.  And thats why Trump and the right arent showing the left respect.  Because you deserve none when you bully others but cant take your own medicine.

The lft hates bullying...unless its the bullying of a conservative.  The left hates stereotyping and name calling...unless its someone whos a conservative.  The left is all about minorities and women...unless that minority or a woman is a conservative.

Democrats became a party of exclusiveness instead of inclusiveness, and can only offer up attacks instead of policies people want.

Chuck Schumer the other day gave a grandstanding speech about how the Repubs are waging a war against seniors.  He still doesnt get it--Americans are tired of hacks like him offering up attacks but no ideas or solutions or substance.

Pushing back by voting in Trump LOL. All you guys did was elevate the billionaire class. The establishment is quaking in their boots over you guys. They wanted me to pass along a message to you, thank you for your vote.

Everyone and I mean everyone of those dumb ass joe the plumbers who vote against their self interest at the local level really do believe they are one clogged toilet away from being a millionaire.

DWags wrote:

steveschneider wrote:

Pushing back by voting in Trump LOL. All you guys did was elevate the billionaire class. The establishment is quaking in their boots over you guys. They wanted me to pass along a message to you, thank you for your vote.

Everyone and I mean everyone of those dumb ass joe the plumbers who vote against their self interest at the local level really do believe they are one clogged toilet away from being a millionaire.

the funny thing about it is that some Trump supporters are already seeing it and he hasn't even been sworn in yet.

The_Dude wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

This continues to be a point worthy of further discussion.

If the principle of one person one equally weighted vote is nullified by the electoral college, does the electoral college itself deny equal protection under the law?

More specifically, do states that distribute electoral college votes based on a winner-take-all formula, which is what drives the nullification of one person one equally weighted vote, violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment? That would be 48 of 50 states.

Now all of a sudden every democrat is a Constitutional scholar?

I'm not a Democrat and my position on the electoral college is 100% anti-constitutional. I fundamentally disagree with the election system the founding fathers and their successors created.

Turtleneck wrote:

The_Dude wrote:

Now all of a sudden every democrat is a Constitutional scholar?  

I am not a Democrat nor am I sorry my posts are too complex for you. Have you thought about checking out tBob? I think that is more your pace.

Srsly. I need more bullet points for my open letter to Iz.

AnomanderRake wrote:

The_Dude wrote:

Now all of a sudden every democrat is a Constitutional scholar?

I'm not a Democrat and my position on the electoral college is 100% anti-constitutional. I fundamentally disagree with the election system the founding fathers and their successors created.

That's because they were smarter than any of us. Straight popular vote is a pretty terrible idea for the UNITED STATES.

Move to CA or OR if you want to be surrounded by liberal echo chambers. Or don't. That's the beauty of our country. Something for everyone.

The_Dude wrote:

AnomanderRake wrote:

I'm not a Democrat and my position on the electoral college is 100% anti-constitutional. I fundamentally disagree with the election system the founding fathers and their successors created.

That's because they were smarter than any of us. Straight popular vote is a pretty terrible idea for the UNITED STATES.

Move to CA or OR if you want to be surrounded by liberal echo chambers. Or don't. That's the beauty of our country. Something for everyone.

They're not infallible. They gave too much power to the states regarding how to select their electors and allocate their electoral college votes. Once the two parties rose to power in every state they conspired to corrupt the electoral college.

I do believe that the electoral college as it was originally designed was at the very least an OK system that lacked safeguards against manipulation. In its current form it is an abomination and not at all what the founders intended. Do you agree or disagree that the electoral college system has been distorted by the two parties to serve their interests?

Also I'm curious as to why you think a popular vote is a terrible idea for the purposes of electing our President? I would agree that it's not a great method for voting on policy, but the three branches work together to form policy so it's not like a popular vote system would be used to determine legislation.

steveschneider wrote:

xsanguine wrote:Couldn't you say that vice versa with a popular vote? Someone is getting controlled one way or the other.

Not really, majority should rule plain and simple. Who cares if the majority is clustered in a few cities?

The best economic opportunities exist in NY and LA, the cities draw the best and the brightest, both cities pay a lot in taxes to this country, and a lot of our taxes goes out to assist a lot of rural America. We should have equal representation not less in the presidential elections.

I do see your point and am playing a little devil's advocate. I think it makes sense to make the majority of people happy... I just have a problem with any side being marginalized by the other group.

Rural America and Urban/Suburban America need each other, either way.

DWags wrote:

The_Dude wrote:

How come you and the left only complain about the election process once you lose?

First, I'll break my rule and talk to you, even though you are one of the biggest pieces of racist trash we have on here, just once.  I know you and X have a hard time following the thread, you're both as narrow minded as I've read here.  However, my answer to X, which I didn't even bother explaining followed the line of "who should we be held hostage to", not the electoral college process, not the majority of voters vs. the constitutional rules of election, but the specific question "Who should we be held hostage to".  More specifically, if you're going to say "someone is getting controlled" one way or the other I thought it would be humorous to say "I'd then settle for the majority".       X being X, didn't quite understand that, and it just wasn't worth a retort, I really don't think he could understand that.\.  You, being the racist idiot you are, can't piece it together either, because you've always been short sighted and idiotic.   

But in the debate over the electoral college, I am the one who giggles at those who say we should change this or that about the process, like there's even a possibility.  These debates are as smart as those people who call into sports talk and say "lets trade Martinez and a minor league picture for Bryce Harper"  Finally, I didn't lose this election, and only a short sighted racist like yourself would think that.   How did I lose an election?   I am a voter who has never been dumb enough to just vote a straight party ticket.  I laugh at those who do.  Especially now.  My First responder friends who did that are now sending representatives to Lansign to protest the Devos family doing away with their pensions.  (I just got word from a friend who is a budget director up there just told me the senate is now backing off the teacher pension thing till next year) It's tragic for the first responders who voted straight republican, walked out of the voting booth electing a man on rhetoric of building a wall/fence and law and order, but also electing Devos puppets.   It's funny, but tragic.  

Yeah, I didn't vote for trump.  I have a wife and two daughters.  I wouldn't do that.   But I didn't "lose" an election.  Many people I voted for won, some lost.  I also went out of the booth knowing that I wasn't stupid enough to vote straight party, I never have been.  Those elections I didn't have time to research I just left blank.  You're an idiot.  If I"m rude to you, so be it, it's not a polite society anymore is it?  It's kind of a grab em by the pussy type society now.   And frankly, you have a huge pussy thats pretty easy to grab.

I thought you swore on your kids that you weren't mad, just amused? This doesn't seem like the rantings of a non-mad person.

The_Dude is offended?

We all know folks like him.  We work with or live near them.  All tough and callous yap until you are face to face when they back off and back down.

For the folks that voted for Trump, you got your candidate a win.  

There is no need to be the perpetual victim(s) fearing the media, entertainers, defending the use of faux news for political gain regardless of who it may harm and go after anyone with a discouraging word with insults about safe spaces etc.

I am even more concerned about Trump's relationship with Putin than I was prior to the election.  Things like considering the President of Exxon for Sec of State.  

The fact that's the same guy who was honored by Putin in 2013 is troubling.

In light of recent intelligence reports, it is worth mentioning that another reason for the electoral college was to guard against foreign interference in our elections. In Federalist #68, Hamilton wrote,

Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption. These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one querter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union? But the convention have guarded against all danger of this sort, with the most provident and judicious attention. They have not made the appointment of the President to depend on any preexisting bodies of men, who might be tampered with beforehand to prostitute their votes; but they have referred it in the first instance to an immediate act of the people of America, to be exerted in the choice of persons for the temporary and sole purpose of making the appointment. And they have excluded from eligibility to this trust, all those who from situation might be suspected of too great devotion to the President in office. No senator, representative, or other person holding a place of trust or profit under the United States, can be of the numbers of the electors. Thus without corrupting the body of the people, the immediate agents in the election will at least enter upon the task free from any sinister bias. Their transient existence, and their detached situation, already taken notice of, afford a satisfactory prospect of their continuing so, to the conclusion of it. The business of corruption, when it is to embrace so considerable a number of men, requires time as well as means. Nor would it be found easy suddenly to embark them, dispersed as they would be over thirteen States, in any combinations founded upon motives, which though they could not properly be denominated corrupt, might yet be of a nature to mislead them from their duty.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed68.asp

^ Just another example of how the Electoral College is no longer serving its intended purpose and hasn't for the last 200 years.

Something to consider -

The mere 472 counties that Hillary Clinton won account for 64% of US economic activity. Trump's 2,584 counties? 36%!

steveschneider wrote:Something to consider -

The mere 472 counties that Hillary Clinton won account for 64% of US economic activity. Trump's 2,584 counties? 36%!

Which is exactly why they voted for Trump - DUH!

Income inequality and lack of jobs. The 64% have been busy shipping the jobs of the 36% overseas and making $$ doing it.

Once upon a time Dems cared about such things.

LooseGoose wrote:

steveschneider wrote:Something to consider -

The mere 472 counties that Hillary Clinton won account for 64% of US economic activity. Trump's 2,584 counties? 36%!

Which is exactly why they voted for Trump - DUH!

Income inequality and lack of jobs. The 64% have been busy shipping the jobs of the 36% overseas and making $$ doing it.

Once upon a time Dems cared about such things.

Democrats and Republicans alike have been proposing legislation for the last 8 years to stimulate job growth. The problem is that both parties keep throwing ridiculous riders into the legislation that the other party will not support so nothing ends up getting done. If they could take their heads out of their asses and pass some bipartisan, focused legislation without riders that have nothing to do with jobs, we'd all be better off.

LooseGoose wrote:

steveschneider wrote:Something to consider -

The mere 472 counties that Hillary Clinton won account for 64% of US economic activity. Trump's 2,584 counties? 36%!

Which is exactly why they voted for Trump - DUH!

Income inequality and lack of jobs. The 64% have been busy shipping the jobs of the 36% overseas and making $$ doing it.

Once upon a time Dems cared about such things.

So you are suggesting the plan to level the playing field is to bring down the 472 counties she won?

steveschneider wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

Which is exactly why they voted for Trump - DUH!

Income inequality and lack of jobs. The 64% have been busy shipping the jobs of the 36% overseas and making $$ doing it.

Once upon a time Dems cared about such things.

So you are suggesting the plan to level the playing field is to bring down the 472 counties she won?

Nope, the plan should be to stimulate economic growth in the 2584 counties. Can you see how wonderful that would be for the country as a whole? Cut regulations - quit bragging about "killing" industries" - look for solutions rather than heap more problems on the people.

It's been said those people voted against their best interests, that's bullshit. They voted to get someone's attention. We'll see if it worked. IF things aren't going better there by 2020 they'll swing right back the other way.

BIAS ALERT: Slate switches from defense of Electoral College to calling it a tool of white supremacy

What a difference four years and Donald Trump's victory make for the liberal site Slate.

Slate published a piece in November 2012 called "In Defense of the Electoral College" that lists five reasons why the system, which allows state electors to ultimately select the future president whether or not that person won the popular vote, is actually great for democracy.

Those reasons include the "certainty of outcome" and being able to avoid run-off elections.

Of course, that was published in the wake of President Obama's victory over Mitt Romney. The left-leaning site is singing a very different tune this year.

Slate published a new piece a few days after this year's election calling the Electoral College an "instrument of white supremacy and sexism."

LooseGoose wrote:BIAS ALERT: Slate switches from defense of Electoral College to calling it a tool of white supremacy

What a difference four years and Donald Trump's victory make for the liberal site Slate.

Slate published a piece in November 2012 called "In Defense of the Electoral College" that lists five reasons why the system, which allows state electors to ultimately select the future president whether or not that person won the popular vote, is actually great for democracy.

Those reasons include the "certainty of outcome" and being able to avoid run-off elections.

Of course, that was published in the wake of President Obama's victory over Mitt Romney. The left-leaning site is singing a very different tune this year.

Slate published a new piece a few days after this year's election calling the Electoral College an "instrument of white supremacy and sexism."

Same author?

DWags wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:BIAS ALERT: Slate switches from defense of Electoral College to calling it a tool of white supremacy

Same author?

No. I think some people struggle to understand the idea behind, and purpose of, opinion pieces in the news.

Turtleneck wrote:

DWags wrote:

Same author?

No. I think some people struggle to understand the idea behind, and purpose of, opinion pieces in the news.

I was hoping that washed over him by itself.

Richard Posner = Joseph Stern

Sean Davis ‏@seanmdav 18h18 hours ago
The political party which uses unelected super-delegates to select its POTUS nominee thinks the Electoral College is unfair. Adorable.

LooseGoose wrote:Sean Davis ‏@seanmdav 18h18 hours ago
The political party which uses unelected super-delegates to select its POTUS nominee thinks the Electoral College is unfair. Adorable.

Seriously, 'Super-Delegates' are a far greater affront to democracy than the Electoral College (which is republican democratic)