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.
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.
I agree.Why disenfranchise millions of votes so some county in Ohio can decide what's good for us and the world?
GromsDad said:What part of this is so hard to grasp?
GromsDad said:StuAzole said:I think the problem for them is that it's gone majority loss the same way twice in the past 5 elections.ifallalot said:I wonder if all you tards would be supporting the Electoral College if cuntbag had won by electoral votes and Trump had won the popular.
At least I'm consistent in knowing that it needs to be destroyed
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?
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:Uhhh, I didn't cast a vote for president.
Uhh huh, you think?GDaddy said:I don't think the tree did, either.
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.Why disenfranchise millions of votes so some county in Ohio can decide what's good for us and the world?
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.
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:I think the problem for them is that it's gone majority loss the same way twice in the past 5 elections.ifallalot said:I wonder if all you tards would be supporting the Electoral College if cuntbag had won by electoral votes and Trump had won the popular.
At least I'm consistent in knowing that it needs to be destroyed
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:That's why you have Congress
GromsDad said:Assimilate or leave.
One more thing, read the Constitution, you insufferable piece of xenophobic sh!t.GromsDad said:I'm saying large concentrations of city dwellers (assholes) shouldn't determine policy
Nobody's talking about outcomes.GDaddy said: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.
Yeah, shut up everybody, you can vote on a local level.GDaddy said:And quit saying votes don't count - they do count at the local levels.
No, it was set up at the time to protect the slave states since they were already in the minority but go ahead believing your religious mythsGromsDad said: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:That's why you have Congress
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:Uhhh, I didn't cast a vote for president.
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 don't think the tree did, either.
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.