Can you imagine being governed by bunch of unchecked JSOs?93henfan wrote:Each state votes and is represented by its Electors in the EC. We don’t have a national popular vote election (thank God).Ibanez wrote: Wait- the election of the President is a state election? I’m not following you....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I see...i never thought of it that way93henfan wrote:Each state votes and is represented by its Electors in the EC. We don’t have a national popular vote election (thank God).Ibanez wrote: Wait- the election of the President is a state election? I’m not following you....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And each state gets to decide how it wants its constituents represented at the national level.Ibanez wrote:I see...i never thought of it that way93henfan wrote:
Each state votes and is represented by its Electors in the EC. We don’t have a national popular vote election (thank God).
No, i'm not trolling. I never thought of the election for the POTUS as a state election vice national.AZGrizFan wrote:And each state gets to decide how it wants its constituents represented at the national level.Ibanez wrote: I see...i never thought of it that way
But I think you're trolling here...
The purpose of the Electoral College is to insure that the Establishment has the Final Word. The founding fathers were decidedly opposed to one man/one vote.GannonFan wrote:Thinking about it a little more, the Electoral College again presents itself as a superior model to direct vote in our Republic in another way - it doesn't sugar coat the winner in tight election. Take this past election - both Clinton and Trump were historically awful candidates. Both were eminently untrustful, both were corrupt, and both were personally very objectionable people. You can argue all day (and JSO has already done it for everyone so please don't start again) if one was less distasteful than the other, but at the end of the day, they were both horrible candidates.
With a direct election, Clinton would've won the popular vote and there would've been a sugarcoating by her supporters that democracy won, a great candidate was elected, and the rest of the country be damned, they're all yokels anyway (well, deplorables at least). Any margin in a direct election is suitable to declare total victory and she would've entered her Presidency with the headwinds of being the popular candidate, despite her well chronicled rank corruption.
With an Electoral College victory, without winning the popular vote, Trump is/was already a wounded President. His baggage from the campaign didn't get washed away with his electoral victory, if anything it magnified it. As Ibanez pointed out, this rarely happens when you look at the history of the US, so Trump is already an oddity just election-wise. The opposition feels justified in thwarting him, and in our government, even the opposition party, without control of either house in the Legislature, is able to muck up the works, and they have. Trump's supporters would love to crow that their man won a mandate, but clearly in a tight election like this with the popular vote not going to the winner, they've been ineffective in doing so. Rather than falling back on the direct vote and spouting "one person one vote" slogans to gloss over the winner's blemishes, the Electoral College has given us a President as hindered as the one who campaigned and won in the EC. I like that.
I supported Hillary during the primaries.Gil Dobie wrote:
JohnStOnge wrote:If you wanted to have a good reason for having the Electoral College it would be that you should not have direct popular vote select the President in any way, shape, or form. The popular vote is a factor in selecting the State legislatures. Then the State legislators pick electors and the electors vote for Presidents. There IS no national election where everybody goes out to vote.
There's an argument for that. But that's not what we're doing. If we WERE doing that Trump would not be President because there is no WAY such a system would tab an atrocity like that as President. There is no way even ONE State legislature would have directed its electors to vote for somebody like that to be in that position.
After all the ink you've spilled, you still don't get it.https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/09/politics ... index.htmlWashington (CNN) - The generic congressional ballot has continued to tighten, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS, with the Democrats' edge over Republicans within the poll's margin of sampling error for the first time this cycle.
About six months out from Election Day, 47% of registered voters say they back the Democratic candidate in their district, 44% back the Republican. Voters also are divided almost evenly over whether the country would be better off with the Democrats in control of Congress (31%) or with the GOP in charge (30%). A sizable 34% -- including nearly half of independent voters (48%) -- say it doesn't matter which party controls Congress.
For the same reason that we've had political gridlock for awhile now - neither party really stands for anything other than opposition to the other party. You almost have to go back to 2000 for the last election where the candidates actually seemed to have policies and weren't just "we're not the other party", and even then it resulted in a pretty historically close election. Since then, it's basically been "we're not the other party" and shockingly, outside of Obama's election in '08 (which for obvious historical implications pulled in more voter interest) the voting public has been unenthused. As obnoxious and distasteful as Trump is to the left leaning electorate, with a Democratic party that is still, at least in the eyes of the public, led by someone like Pelosi for a good two decades now, there's no guarantee that that will motivate the electorate.93henfan wrote:Looks like some cresting may have occurred with that blue wave.https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/09/politics ... index.htmlWashington (CNN) - The generic congressional ballot has continued to tighten, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS, with the Democrats' edge over Republicans within the poll's margin of sampling error for the first time this cycle.
About six months out from Election Day, 47% of registered voters say they back the Democratic candidate in their district, 44% back the Republican. Voters also are divided almost evenly over whether the country would be better off with the Democrats in control of Congress (31%) or with the GOP in charge (30%). A sizable 34% -- including nearly half of independent voters (48%) -- say it doesn't matter which party controls Congress.
You are correct, sir.GannonFan wrote:For the same reason that we've had political gridlock for awhile now - neither party really stands for anything other than opposition to the other party. You almost have to go back to 2000 for the last election where the candidates actually seemed to have policies and weren't just "we're not the other party", and even then it resulted in a pretty historically close election. Since then, it's basically been "we're not the other party" and shockingly, outside of Obama's election in '08 (which for obvious historical implications pulled in more voter interest) the voting public has been unenthused. As obnoxious and distasteful as Trump is to the left leaning electorate, with a Democratic party that is still, at least in the eyes of the public, led by someone like Pelosi for a good two decades now, there's no guarantee that that will motivate the electorate.93henfan wrote:Looks like some cresting may have occurred with that blue wave.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/09/politics ... index.html
I fully blame moveon.org and the crank nutty left that arose in GW Bush's first term for starting this self-perpetuating cycle.GannonFan wrote: For the same reason that we've had political gridlock for awhile now - neither party really stands for anything other than opposition to the other party. You almost have to go back to 2000 for the last election where the candidates actually seemed to have policies and weren't just "we're not the other party", and even then it resulted in a pretty historically close election. Since then, it's basically been "we're not the other party" and shockingly, outside of Obama's election in '08 (which for obvious historical implications pulled in more voter interest) the voting public has been unenthused.
Yup, I blame Ralph too.Pwns wrote:I fully blame moveon.org and the crank nutty left that arose in GW Bush's first term for starting this self-perpetuating cycle.GannonFan wrote: For the same reason that we've had political gridlock for awhile now - neither party really stands for anything other than opposition to the other party. You almost have to go back to 2000 for the last election where the candidates actually seemed to have policies and weren't just "we're not the other party", and even then it resulted in a pretty historically close election. Since then, it's basically been "we're not the other party" and shockingly, outside of Obama's election in '08 (which for obvious historical implications pulled in more voter interest) the voting public has been unenthused.
I hear a lot of left wingers blaming talk radio, but all the "Bush stole the election" and "Chimpitler McCheneyburton lied, kids died" garbage was the end of calm, rational, fact-based politics.
And I'm not saying both sides don't share blame, but the whackjob left was the figurative battery that got the pistons in the engine going.
And Jon...don’t forget him...GannonFan wrote:Yup, I blame Ralph too.Pwns wrote:
I fully blame moveon.org and the crank nutty left that arose in GW Bush's first term for starting this self-perpetuating cycle.
I hear a lot of left wingers blaming talk radio, but all the "Bush stole the election" and "Chimpitler McCheneyburton lied, kids died" garbage was the end of calm, rational, fact-based politics.
And I'm not saying both sides don't share blame, but the whackjob left was the figurative battery that got the pistons in the engine going.
True dat. Jon is like Ralph without the weird Chinese fetish. That we know of at least.Col Hogan wrote:And Jon...don’t forget him...GannonFan wrote:
Yup, I blame Ralph too.
Jon has a bear fetish...GannonFan wrote:True dat. Jon is like Ralph without the weird Chinese fetish. That we know of at least.Col Hogan wrote:
And Jon...don’t forget him...
You’re either completely delilusional or too young to be aware of the Bush administration, Iraq war, and 90’s right wing talk radio.Pwns wrote:I fully blame moveon.org and the crank nutty left that arose in GW Bush's first term for starting this self-perpetuating cycle.GannonFan wrote: For the same reason that we've had political gridlock for awhile now - neither party really stands for anything other than opposition to the other party. You almost have to go back to 2000 for the last election where the candidates actually seemed to have policies and weren't just "we're not the other party", and even then it resulted in a pretty historically close election. Since then, it's basically been "we're not the other party" and shockingly, outside of Obama's election in '08 (which for obvious historical implications pulled in more voter interest) the voting public has been unenthused.
I hear a lot of left wingers blaming talk radio, but all the "Bush stole the election" and "Chimpitler McCheneyburton lied, kids died" garbage was the end of calm, rational, fact-based politics.
And I'm not saying both sides don't share blame, but the whackjob left was the figurative battery that got the pistons in the engine going.
What about 90s talk radio? Rush Limbaugh was the only guy that was really prominent back in those days and you don't have to like or respect his opinions but he's not Glenn Beck or Alex Jones and he has never really dealt with conspiracy theories the same way the Kos/moveon nuts do.kalm wrote:You’re either completely delilusional or too young to be aware of the Bush administration, Iraq war, and 90’s right wing talk radio.Pwns wrote:
I fully blame moveon.org and the crank nutty left that arose in GW Bush's first term for starting this self-perpetuating cycle.
I hear a lot of left wingers blaming talk radio, but all the "Bush stole the election" and "Chimpitler McCheneyburton lied, kids died" garbage was the end of calm, rational, fact-based politics.
And I'm not saying both sides don't share blame, but the whackjob left was the figurative battery that got the pistons in the engine going.
We can argue who’s more at fault but to “fully blame” the left for the deteriotiom of discourse is laughable.
He's been pretty nut job lately. His big thing recently has been that the reason Trump is getting so much grief is that he's an outsider and "they" just don't want an outsider. I was listening to him the other day and heard him say he doesn't know who "they" are. But "they" don't want an outsider.Pwns wrote: What about 90s talk radio? Rush Limbaugh was the only guy that was really prominent back in those days and you don't have to like or respect his opinions but he's not Glenn Beck or Alex Jones and he has never really dealt with conspiracy theories the same way the Kos/moveon nuts do.
Yeah, he's definitely a Trump water carrier now. But he was never a real conspiracy theory guy and I know that you probably know that (see the "benefit of listening to Rush Limbaugh" thread you made).JohnStOnge wrote:He's been pretty nut job lately. His big thing recently has been that the reason Trump is getting so much grief is that he's an outsider and "they" just don't want an outsider. I was listening to him the other day and heard him say he doesn't know who "they" are. But "they" don't want an outsider.Pwns wrote: What about 90s talk radio? Rush Limbaugh was the only guy that was really prominent back in those days and you don't have to like or respect his opinions but he's not Glenn Beck or Alex Jones and he has never really dealt with conspiracy theories the same way the Kos/moveon nuts do.
Of course we all know the fact that Trump is an "outsider" isn't what it is. What it is is that Trump lies all the time, has a long history of cheating people, and appears to have serious emotional maturity and stability problems.
But that's the line Rush Limbaugh is pushing. It's "conspiracy theory" to the max. There's this shady "they" that can't really be described but that doesn't like Trump simply because he's an "outsider."
* deteriorationkalm wrote:You’re either completely delilusional or too young to be aware of the Bush administration, Iraq war, and 90’s right wing talk radio.Pwns wrote:
I fully blame moveon.org and the crank nutty left that arose in GW Bush's first term for starting this self-perpetuating cycle.
I hear a lot of left wingers blaming talk radio, but all the "Bush stole the election" and "Chimpitler McCheneyburton lied, kids died" garbage was the end of calm, rational, fact-based politics.
And I'm not saying both sides don't share blame, but the whackjob left was the figurative battery that got the pistons in the engine going.
We can argue who’s more at fault but to “fully blame” the left for the deteriotiom of discourse is laughable.
I thought he was referring to a new element on the periodic tableIvytalk wrote:* deteriorationkalm wrote:
You’re either completely delilusional or too young to be aware of the Bush administration, Iraq war, and 90’s right wing talk radio.
We can argue who’s more at fault but to “fully blame” the left for the deteriotiom of discourse is laughable.
FIFY. Figured almost 2 years into the investigation and zero evidence that it should be included in your list as well. You're welcome.Pwns wrote:What about 90s talk radio? Rush Limbaugh was the only guy that was really prominent back in those days and you don't have to like or respect his opinions but he's not Glenn Beck or Alex Jones and he has never really dealt with conspiracy theories the same way the Kos/moveon nuts do.kalm wrote:
You’re either completely delilusional or too young to be aware of the Bush administration, Iraq war, and 90’s right wing talk radio.
We can argue who’s more at fault but to “fully blame” the left for the deteriotiom of discourse is laughable.
The first completely off-the-rails bat-poop nutty opposition to a US president was when Bush was in office. And yes, if you think Bush lied to go to Iraq or stole the election you are on par with Sandy Hook truthers and birthers, Russian collusion apologists, and other fringe, alternative-facts types.
Like I said, the left aren't the only ones involved in the positive feedback loop, but they are the ones that started it.
If you really want to trigger JSO, just post this instead:93henfan wrote:Looks like some cresting may have occurred with that blue wave.https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/09/politics ... index.htmlWashington (CNN) - The generic congressional ballot has continued to tighten, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS, with the Democrats' edge over Republicans within the poll's margin of sampling error for the first time this cycle.
About six months out from Election Day, 47% of registered voters say they back the Democratic candidate in their district, 44% back the Republican. Voters also are divided almost evenly over whether the country would be better off with the Democrats in control of Congress (31%) or with the GOP in charge (30%). A sizable 34% -- including nearly half of independent voters (48%) -- say it doesn't matter which party controls Congress.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/celebri ... ar-AAwHDXyAccording to the results of a Reuters weekly tracking poll released this week, support for the president among black men doubled from 11 percent, for the week ending April 22, to 22 percent, for the week ending April 29. The approval numbers are the highest Trump has enjoyed in the survey among black men all year.
