|
|
| ||||||||
| From | Message | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
dmaestro 02-Sep-20, 08:57 |
 Electoral College A good explanation of why it’s harmful. |
|||||||
|
Interesting... Population centers with massive population should not decide elections. |
|||||||
|
Tenaday |
|||||||
|
Because... If you went by major population centers you cancel out the little people living in states that have low populations. Each state should have a say. By your logic New York and California should decide all elections? |
|||||||
|
So you see... Population centers like New York and California will vote based on what they are experiencing at home. Which has nothing to do with other states. |
|||||||
|
Do... Do population centers like New York and California understand what it's like in Alaska? The list goes on my good man... |
|||||||
|
Tenaday Population centers think alike” That’s pretty easy to say but isn’t close to accurate. According to whom? How are you measuring ‘think alike?’ Have you ever lived in a city? |
|||||||
|
Tenaday California is the largest agricultural producer in the country. Maybe they understates a little. ‘Do population centers like New York and California understand what it's like in Alaska?’ Probably not. That’s why we have a House of Representatives. “The list goes on my good man...” I’m not ‘your man.’ |
|||||||
|
Well... Poor people being promised the world just for votes. Have you noticed major cities that are Democrat are the worst out there? I have lived in Washington DC and Boston for many years. I have been all over the States and Canada. I was wondering why you are worried about the electoral college and then I seen your profile. Portland Oregon. That explains a lot. Your city is in shambles and you think you know what is best for the rest of the country because some liberal homeless kids and antifa have inspired you? |
|||||||
|
And you seriously think everyone thinks the same? In DC?? What!?!? “I have been all over the States and Canada.” Uh huh. “I was wondering why you are worried about the electoral college” Because I believe in democracy. One person one vote. You disagree. Fair enough. “and then I seen your profile. Portland Oregon. That explains a lot” What it explains is your misconceptions. “Your city is in shambles” I see you still believe what the media tells you to believe. Trust me, Portlannis not close to shambles. |
|||||||
|
Alright... Homeless kids and Antifa leading the way! Next I will have to learn the new way of self loathing because I am white. Please teach me the ways of your irrelevant state of Oregon so I can be pure like you. Obviously you are scared Trump will win again. Biden winning won't change anything. |
|||||||
|
zorroloco 07-Sep-20, 17:15 |
Deleted by zorroloco on 07-Sep-20, 17:16.
|
|||||||
|
“We will vote Democrat so all of our cities can be in chaos like Democrat cities.” Actually your contention that ‘dem’ cities are in chaos is false. But I’ll not try to educate the willingly ignorant. “Homeless kids and Antifa leading the way!” Homeless children are political props to you. That’s why you’re a trumpie. Homeless kids are victims of a stacked system needing a hand up. That’s why I’m progressive. And if you’re not Anti fascist, you’re pro fascist “Next I will have to learn the new way of self loathing because I am white.” That stupid. Why would you hate yourself? Well... you know yourself best and what you’re worth. I’ll take your word for it.” “Please teach me the ways of your irrelevant state of Oregon so I can be pure like you.” Liberty, freedom and a community mind set. It’s not that hard. “Obviously you are scared Trump will win again.” Obviously. As a patriot, I understand a trump victory will be disastrous for our country. “Biden winning won't change anything.” Then vote Biden. Btw, here see a few other patriots who fear a trump victory.., Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis Former Secretary of Defense under Trump Statement released June 3 "Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people -- does not even pretend to try. Instead he tries to divide us. We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society." Marine Corps. Gen. John Kelly Former Chief of Staff to Trump, Former commander of US Southern Command under Obama "I would've argued against it, recommended against it," Kelly said of Trump's photo-op. "I would argue that the end result of that was predictable." "I think we need to look harder at who we elect. I think we should look at people that are running for office and put them through the filter: What is their character like? What are their ethics?" Marine Corps Gen. John Allen Former commander of US forces in Afghanistan under Obama Commentary published June 3 by Foreign Policy "Donald Trump isn't religious, has no need of religion, and doesn't care about the devout, except insofar as they serve his political needs...To even the casual observer, Monday was awful for the United States and its democracy. The president's speech was calculated to project his abject and arbitrary power, but he failed to project any of the higher emotions or leadership desperately needed in every quarter of this nation during this dire moment." Navy Adm. Mike Mullen Former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under George W. Bush and Obama Op-ed for The Atlantic published June 2 "It sickened me yesterday to see security personnel—including members of the National Guard—forcibly and violently clear a path through Lafayette Square to accommodate the president's visit outside St. John's Church. I have to date been reticent to speak out on issues surrounding President Trump's leadership, but we are at an inflection point, and the events of the past few weeks have made it impossible to remain silent. Whatever Trump's goal in conducting his visit, he laid bare his disdain for the rights of peaceful protest in this country, gave succor to the leaders of other countries who take comfort in our domestic strife, and risked further politicizing the men and women of our armed forces. There was little good in the stunt." Air Force Gen. Richard Myers Former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under George W. Bush Interview with CNN on June 4 "The first thing was just absolute sadness that people aren't allowed to protest and that, as I understand it, that was a peaceful protest that was disturbed by force, and that's not right. That should not happen in America. And so I was sad. I mean, we should all shed tears over that, that particular act. ...I'm glad I don't have to advise this President. I'm sure the senior military leadership is finding it really difficult these days to provide good, sound military advice." Army Gen. Martin Dempsey Former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Obama Interview with NPR on June 4 "The idea that the President would take charge of the situation using the military was troubling to me." William Perry Former Defense Secretary served under Clinton "I am outraged at the deplorable behavior of our President and Defense Secretary Esper, threatening to use American military forces to suppress peaceful demonstrators exercising their constitutional rights. This is a deeply shameful moment for our nation." Navy Adm. William McRaven Former commander of US Special Operations Command under Obama Interview with MSNBC on June 5 "You're not going to use, whether it's the military, or the National Guard, or law enforcement, to clear peaceful American citizens for the President of the United States to do a photo op. There is nothing morally right about that." Navy Adm. James Stavridis Former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO Commentary published by Time on June 3 "Our active duty military must remain above the fray of domestic politics, and the best way to do that is to keep that force focused on its rightful mission outside the United States. Our senior active duty military leaders must make that case forcefully and directly to national leadership, speaking truth to power in uncomfortable ways. They must do this at the risk of their career. I hope they will do so, and not allow the military to be dragged into the maelstrom that is ahead of us, and which will likely only accelerate between now and November. If they do not stand and deliver on this vital core value, I fear for the soul of our military and all of the attendant consequences." Army Gen. Raymond A. "Tony" Thomas Former commander of US Special Operations Command under Obama and Trump On Esper's use of the term "battlespace" when discussing quelling violence on the streets amid civil unrest: "The 'battle space' of America??? Not what America needs to hear...ever, unless we are invaded by an adversary or experience a constitutional failure...ie a Civil War..." Air Force Gen. Mike Hayden Former director of the CIA and NSA under Bush and Obama On Milley joining Trump for his walk in front of the White House after protesters were cleared: "I was appalled to see him in his battle dress. Milley (he's a general?!?) should not have walked over to the church with Trump." Ash Carter Former Defense Secretary under Obama Statement on June 5 "The Department of Defense exists to safeguard our citizens, not dominate them. I was dismayed to see DoD drawn inappropriately this week into the President's response to protests. There is here no need, no warrant, and no excuse to bring active-duty military force into the restoration of order. I say this as a former Secretary of Defense who death with many situations where military intervention was helpful, even vital, in the homeland — past epidemics, hurricanes and floods, and so forth. Equally abhorrent to me was the inclusion of defense leaders in political theater." Leon Panetta and Chuck Hagel Former defense secretaries under Obama Joined Carter and 86 other former defense officials in Washington Post open letter on June 5 "As former leaders in the Defense Department — civilian and military, Republican, Democrat and independent — we all took an oath upon assuming office 'to support and defend the Constitution of the United States' as did the president and all members of the military, a fact that Gen. Milley pointed out in a recent memorandum to members of the armed forces. We are alarmed at how the president is betraying this oath by threatening to order members of the U.S. military to violate the rights of their fellow Americans." |
|||||||
|
brigadecommander 07-Sep-20, 19:18 |
Deleted by brigadecommander on 07-Sep-20, 20:08.
|
|||||||
|
dmaestro 07-Sep-20, 20:03 |
Tenaday Based on your attitude, white nationalist sympathies and personal attacks my recommendation is to quit this club and stick with the mostly conservative clubs that agree with you. This is NOT a good fit; we have civil, fact based discussions here. I find your attack on democracy and city dwellers not even worth discussing. I know Oregon well. Your description is nonsense. |
|||||||
|
sorry DM |
|||||||
|
dmaestro 07-Sep-20, 21:00 |
If not for racist southern senators the EC would have been eliminated in 1970. |
|||||||
|
Sore losers... You want to change the rules because Hillary lost? If Hillary won because of the electoral college none of you would be saying anything about it. And all those military personnel posts above are laughable. Why don't they like Trump? Because he doesn't start wars like other presidents? They are bored and have nobody to attack? Democrats are warmongers. |
|||||||
|
Ten No. We've been against the EC for years. "If Hillary won because of the electoral college none of you would be saying anything about it." You're wrong. Demonstrably. We've been arguing against the EC for many years. "And all those military personnel posts above are laughable." Yes. I know you right wingers hate the military and all it stands for. just like trump thinks their stupid losers. Thats why we need someone like Biden who supports our troops. "Why don't they like Trump? Because he doesn't start wars like other presidents?" Because he disrespects the military and doesn't understand or respect the Constitution. |
|||||||
|
dmaestro 08-Sep-20, 09:55 |
Tenaday You are not paying attention. In 1970 80% of the public wanted the EC gone. It’s wasn’t a partisan issue. A racist Southern senator blocked it. My parents were Republicans who opposed the EC. I’ve never supported the EC. Never will! The EC still lacks majority support. Presidents represent the whole country not one region. The EC means your vote is meaningless if you are not the majority. You can theoretically win the EC while losing the popular vote by 77% to 23%. It prevents third parties. It’s a destructive artifact. |
|||||||
|
Well... I just looked it up and according to Wikipedia we are 50/50 when it comes to support for the electoral college system. What is real thought? Oh I get it... If someone doesn't agree with a liberal then they must be wrong right? The popular vote is flawed. People will vote for a candidate on ridiculous grounds. How many voted for Hillary just to see "The first female president"? How many voted for Obama just to see "The first black president"? Many YouTube videos showing people voting for those two just because of those ridiculous reasons. Not all people vote like that but a lot do. Why do you think the Democrats pander so much? It's just to get votes. They know they can get votes based on emotions, gender and skin colour. Ergo, Harris |
|||||||
|
And... Most Biden voters can't even say what Biden's campaign is about other than..."We hate Trump" See what I mean about the popular vote? Most people base it on a popularity contest instead of key issues. |
|||||||
|
Ten I just looked it up and according to Wikipedia we are 50/50 when it comes to support for the electoral college system." So perhaps its worth revisiting? "What is real thought? Oh I get it... If someone doesn't agree with a liberal then they must be wrong right?" No. It means, for example, discussing the possibility of doing something that half the country supports. Not brushing it off because you happen to disagree. "The popular vote is flawed. People will vote for a candidate on ridiculous grounds. How many voted for Hillary just to see "The first female president"? How many voted for Obama just to see "The first black president"? Many YouTube videos showing people voting for those two just because of those ridiculous reasons." Not all people vote like that but a lot do." On both sides. Stupidity is nonpartisan. If you don't see that, than there really is no point discussing with you because you're of the good vs. evil mindset that won't allow compromise or reason. I notice you don't mention all the idiots voting for trump "cuz he's a straight shooter' who 'tells it like it is,' and 'will run the country like a business.' Never mentioning all the businesses he's destroyed or his pathological mendacity. "Why do you think the Democrats pander so much? It's just to get votes. They know they can get votes based on emotions, gender and skin colour." Ergo, Harris" This is priceless. Is not trump the king of panderers? Panders to white nationalists, bigots, and pretends to be Christian to garner the gullible Christian right. "And... And don't forget how many people are voting for Biden just because they hate Trump. Most Biden voters can't even say what Biden's campaign is about other than..."We hate Trump"" It has nothing to do with hating trump. he's a whiny pos worthy hate. but its incompetence, immorality, disloyalty, mendacity and lack of concern for America or Americans that make us vote against him rather than for someone else. "See what I mean about the popular vote? Most people base it on a popularity contest instead of key issues." I do. Both you seem to ignore the issues own the right that concern you own the left. Furthermore, you've presented no evidence whatsoever that the electoral voters are a whit more trustworthy than the people. Why do you trust them? |
|||||||
|
Trust I would rather they decide than leaving it up to the people which consist of illiterates, addicts, drop-outs, and liberals etc etc. Why would I want those people to decide? Some of them can't even read! |
|||||||
|
dmaestro 08-Sep-20, 12:43 |
Tenaday Electors are not making a choice they vote for their party’s candidate regardless and whether the candidate won by one vote or a landslide doesn’t matter. It’s true the original EC intention was, before parties formed, the electors would be wise and informed, and have many candidates to choose the Prez and VP as runner up from; and would potentially override the popular vote if the winner was unsuitable. That is not the case now. The EC is a waste of time and money all you have to do is count the electoral votes. We need more than 2 parties and for the President to have popular support or this country is toast. It’s obvious you fell in love with the EC just because it skews results in your favor and every other argument is just a pretext. Just admit it... Also you are wrong about support for the EC: www.google.com |
|||||||
|
Well... That is what it says in the club description. It seems you have the same problem that every liberal has... You can't handle people disagreeing with you. Work on that. Life is too short to be stressed about things you can't change. |
|||||||
|
DM |
|||||||
|
LoL LoL |
|||||||
|
Well... |
|||||||
|
Ten "It seems you have the same problem that every liberal has... You can't handle people disagreeing with you." Can't handle? what does that even mean? |
|||||||
| ||||||||
