REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Electoral College
- Thread starter GromsDad
- Start date
Because it's relevant at some point.FecalFace said:Why even think about it in geographical terms? What sense does that make?casa_mugrienta said:I don't like the Electoral College.FecalFace said:"Bingo"?
You didn't win anything dum dum.
1 citizen = 1 vote
Not:
California citizen = ZERO votes
Ohio citizen = 1 vote
That said - should the needs of Ohio, Florida, the NE megalopolis (PA,NJ,NYC, the Beltway) be able to dominate the rest of the country?
It seems like a popular vote would just trade the Electoral College for a more urbanized domination of the vote.
Not sure that's the correct system for a country as diverse in geography and resources such as the United States.
People for the most part tend to vote their needs. No reason to give the East Coast more power to shaft the rest of the country when such situations arise.
I agree.
On the flip side a popular vote would essentially do the same thing - give people living in heavily urban environments, more specifically the East Coast, the power to decide what happens everywhere else.
Comparable would be when "more educated" people in the administration level of public education disempower "less educated" teachers from running their own classrooms.
You have to have balance.
GromsDad said:What part of this is so hard to grasp?
What part of 1 citizen = 1 vote you don't understand?
This is one of your RED areas from your stupid map right here. Do you see any citizens eligible to vote in this picture?
[size:16pt]This tree gets to decide the leader of the Free World. Its vote is more important than GDaddy's.[/size]
Uhhh, I didn't cast a vote for president. I don't think the tree did, either. My guess is that a lot more dead people voted in this election than trees, and it still wasn't enough.
So technically I'm not part of the F-U vote against HRC. Despite my personal opinions of her.
So technically I'm not part of the F-U vote against HRC. Despite my personal opinions of her.
GromsDad said:StuAzole said:
Stop to consider why that happens. Do you really want people who live like this to determine who is our president simply because a sh!t-ton of them are cramped into living in such shitty places and because democraps can entice them to vote against the makers in this country. These people have no perspective on the rest of the country. You think these assholes are ever going to vote against free stuff?
So in another words what you're saying is that the votes of the poor and mostly minority communities of this country shouldn't count, am I right?
I just don't want to hear the words "will of the people" when these asshats are passing some sort of oppressive legislature, taking away healthcare from millions or appointing an extremist Judge to the SCOTUS. You can't say that and be an honest person when you lost the popular vote by 1.5 million.
No you didn't and if you did, it wouldn't matter anyway because your vote for president never counted for as long as you lived.GDaddy said:
What about the people who give a sh!t about voting?
What do you say to them?
Move to Iowa?
Uhh huh, you think?GDaddy said:
I was only illustrating GromDad's stupid point / map.
Sometimes you have to draw a picture so the retards can understand.
PS That tree has as much voting power as any conservative voting for president and living in California. Let that sink in for a sec.
No it wouldn't.casa_mugrienta said:Because it's relevant at some point.FecalFace said:Why even think about it in geographical terms? What sense does that make?casa_mugrienta said:I don't like the Electoral College.FecalFace said:"Bingo"?
You didn't win anything dum dum.
1 citizen = 1 vote
Not:
California citizen = ZERO votes
Ohio citizen = 1 vote
That said - should the needs of Ohio, Florida, the NE megalopolis (PA,NJ,NYC, the Beltway) be able to dominate the rest of the country?
It seems like a popular vote would just trade the Electoral College for a more urbanized domination of the vote.
Not sure that's the correct system for a country as diverse in geography and resources such as the United States.
People for the most part tend to vote their needs. No reason to give the East Coast more power to shaft the rest of the country when such situations arise.
I agree.
On the flip side a popular vote would essentially do the same thing - give people living in heavily urban environments, more specifically the East Coast, the power to decide what happens everywhere else.
Comparable would be when "more educated" people in the administration level of public education disempower "less educated" teachers from running their own classrooms.
You have to have balance.
1 person = 1 vote
If the minority thinks their ideas are better they have to work harder to convince the majority, regardless of where they live.
The balance comes from Congress
No. I'm saying large concentrations of city dwellers (assholes) shouldn't determine policy for everyone else who live in less concentrated places.frvcvs said:GromsDad said:StuAzole said:
Stop to consider why that happens. Do you really want people who live like this to determine who is our president simply because a sh!t-ton of them are cramped into living in such shitty places and because democraps can entice them to vote against the makers in this country. These people have no perspective on the rest of the country. You think these assholes are ever going to vote against free stuff?
So in another words what you're saying is that the votes of the poor and mostly minority communities of this country shouldn't count, am I right?
The founders set it up so the number of your states electors equals the number you have in congress plus your two senators. Pure genius. There was a very real fear at the time that the states would split apart and the founders in their wisdom devised our method of representation and balance of power.ifallalot said:
GromsDad said:
One more thing, read the Constitution, you insufferable piece of xenophobic sh!t.GromsDad said:
Assholes are people too, their votes should count and not discarded like your fetus should have been.
The assumption that the popular vote would have returned the same result if the election had been for the popular vote instead of the EC is just that - an assumption,. The assumption that the campaign platforms and the candidates themselves would have been the same is also just an assumption.
If you disapprove of the EC there's an app for changing that. Sniveling because the election results turns out to be a surprise isn't it. California's result represents the will of the people in California.
And quit saying votes don't count - they do count at the state levels.
If you disapprove of the EC there's an app for changing that. Sniveling because the election results turns out to be a surprise isn't it. California's result represents the will of the people in California.
And quit saying votes don't count - they do count at the state levels.
Nobody's talking about outcomes.GDaddy said:
We are talking about the fact that each vote should be counted and you are ignoring that fact and talkging about something nobody else is talking about.
Yeah, shut up everybody, you can vote on a local level.GDaddy said:
The President of the USA doesn't matter.
I think the whole highly populated state vs lightly populated state issue is adequately resolved by dividing the legislative branch into House and Senate. The fact that the executive branch candidate who gets fewer votes wins makes a mockery of the concept of democracy. My wife, who is from Italy, just can't wrap her head around it. In fact any outside observer would be perplexed- you lose but you win. 
And to Gromsdad- everyone lives in a bubble. Everyone. Absolutely no exceptions. And to post up photos of Los Angeles and New York and assume people who "live like this" all think and act the same just demonstrates how small your bubble is.
And to Gromsdad- everyone lives in a bubble. Everyone. Absolutely no exceptions. And to post up photos of Los Angeles and New York and assume people who "live like this" all think and act the same just demonstrates how small your bubble is.
FecalFace said:No you didn't and if you did, it wouldn't matter anyway because your vote for president never counted for as long as you lived.GDaddy said:
What about the people who give a sh!t about voting?
What do you say to them?
Move to Iowa?
Uhh huh, you think?GDaddy said:
I was only illustrating GromDad's stupid point / map.
Sometimes you have to draw a picture so the retards can understand.
PS That tree has as much voting power as any conservative voting for president and living in California. Let that sink in for a sec.
You missed your AE (Angry Expat) Meeting today again.
How many groms did you spear from your anger today?
Oh wait - -your so out of fu cking shape and out of touch you couldn't get off the fuggin couch my sources tell me and my sources are spot MUUTHR FKN ON!
Die troll die! :cussing:
PS : Your hacking friends are third rate humans. You know exactly what I mean you fat racist fuktwit.
Just die