Recruiting Forum Off-Topic Thread II

Status
Not open for further replies.
#6,476
#6,476
Dust10 said:
How do you feel about awarding EC votes by Congressional district instead of winner take all - as they do in Maine and Nebraska?

This would be a massive boom for the Republican Party, btw.
Click to expand...

I think that this would allow for the individual vote to mean more. In a state that generally goes for one party there are districts where the voters prefer the other party. However, the winner take all method means their vote is squashed by the majority in their state. This would benefit urban population centers in red states and rural populations in blue states. I could get behind that.

However, I really wish a viable 3rd party would come along that would challenge the two existing parties to stop their shenanigans. Right now it is just a constant squabble between siblings and the people fail to get good government. I also think Congress should have term limits and that the Congress should meet for three months or so in the summer. They should have to pass the Authorization and Appropriations bills before they do anything else. If they get that done in the allotted time, then they can put other items on the table. The rest of the time they should have to be in their state amongst their constituents.
 
#6,477
#6,477
The sooner that people realize the only sensible way to select a president is to follow the original intent of the producers of Death Race 2000, the better off we'll all be.
 
#6,478
#6,478
glichtenwalter said:
It is a combination of popular vote and electoral college. The winner of the popular vote in each state gets the EC votes. However, because the smaller states have proportional representation in Congress, they cannot be ignored when the Presidential election comes around.
Click to expand...

But larger states have more congressmen/women correct and therefore they get more electoral votes...

Maybe the electoral college needs some tuning or the popular vote becomes a "51st state" that means if you win the popular vote the opponent has to win more electoral votes?
 
#6,480
#6,480
glichtenwalter said:
No. My argument is that the people in the flyover states matter just as much and those in the urban areas. The large majority of welfare recipients live in urban areas and can be "bought" with the promise of more government assistance and programs. How about this, we go to a popular vote but if you are on welfare you give up your right to vote. Just like Congress shouldn't be allowed to vote them selves a pay raise, you shouldn't be allowed to vote if you stand to benefit without providing equal benefit in exchange.
Click to expand...

Wrong!

Underlying these numbers is a little-noticed trend: a large and growing gap between the participation rates for urban and rural Americans. Individuals living in urban areas participate at lower rates: in 2010, they had a participation rate of 72.9 percent versus 85.6 percent for those in rural areas. This differential—now, more than 12 percentage points—has grown in recent years. It was less than 5 percentage points during 2003 and 2004. Going back to 1997 and earlier, eligibles in urban areas actually participated at higher rates than eligibles in rural areas. In 1995, for instance, the urban participation rate was 77.8 percent, compared with a rural rate of 65.5 percent.
Click to expand...

Urban-Rural Trends in SNAP Participation: What's Going On? | Urban Institute
 
#6,481
#6,481
bignewt said:
The bottom line is that the salt of the earth middle of the country voted for a born into money spoiled egomaniac New Yorker who could not care less about anything past E. 60th street unless it has a craps table or 18 holes thinking he will bring them change.

Hey we need less serial killers around, lets vote for Ted Bundy!

Its equal parts tragedy and comedy.
Click to expand...

So you're saying the others, the ones that voted for Hillary are any better? African Americans have supported democrats for the last 70 years despite the fact they've done nothing for them but make many dependent on the government for their daily survival. Voted for someone that's known nothing but corrupt politics for most of her adult life.

I'm no Trump flag carrier but at least he's survived outside of being spoon fed by the government.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#6,482
#6,482
InVOLuntary said:
So you're saying the others, the ones that voted for Hillary are any better? African Americans have supported democrats for the last 70 years despite the fact they've done nothing for them but make many dependent on the government for their daily survival. Voted for someone that's known nothing but corrupt politics for most of her adult life.

I'm no Trump flag carrier but at least he's survived outside of being spoon fed by the government.
Click to expand...

You have forgotten my political leanings so quickly? I could write pages on the criminally insane mind of Hilary and the absurdist government hungry socialists.
 
#6,483
#6,483
Hypothetical:

Take the country and divide it into two countries. Let the Liberals have one and the conservatives have the other. Let people choose which half they want to reside and they have to stay there. Which one survives? Assuming both have the same resources.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,484
#6,484
#6,485
#6,485
bignewt said:
You have forgotten my political leanings so quickly? I could write pages on the criminally insane mind of Hilary and the absurdist government hungry socialists.
Click to expand...

I know exactly where you lie and almost just ignored your post but you seem to be ultra critical of Trump while ignoring almost the same ironic circumstances of the Hilleryites.
 
#6,486
#6,486
InVOLuntary said:
Hypothetical:

Take the country and divide it into two countries. Let the Liberals have one and the conservatives have the other. Let people choose which half they want to reside and they have to stay there. Which one survives? Assuming both have the same resources.
Click to expand...

The liberal side wouldn't last long because they wouldn't have anyone to mooch off of.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,487
#6,487
InVOLuntary said:
So you're saying the others, the ones that voted for Hillary are any better? African Americans have supported democrats for the last 70 years despite the fact they've done nothing for them but make many dependent on the government for their daily survival. Voted for someone that's known nothing but corrupt politics for most of her adult life.

I'm no Trump flag carrier but at least he's survived outside of being spoon fed by the government.
Click to expand...

Amen brother!
 
#6,488
#6,488
Dust10 said:
The Electoral College was created as a check against foreign influence in our elections.

Your argument is basically people in "flyover" states are somehow wiser and better morals than those in urban areas?
Click to expand...

It was also created so only a few States (like Virginia when it was created) don't control the results of the elections.

The issues of the metropolis does not equal the issues of the rural residents. The electoral college is necessary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,489
#6,489
glichtenwalter said:
The liberal side wouldn't last long because they wouldn't have anyone to mooch off of.
Click to expand...

That and all the people that want to contribute to society would end up on the conservative side. The liberal side would end up with only the takers and the few that feel guilty for having anything. Their money would soon evaporate and the walls would come tumbling down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,490
#6,490
InVOLuntary said:
Hypothetical:

Take the country and divide it into two countries. Let the Liberals have one and the conservatives have the other. Let people choose which half they want to reside and they have to stay there. Which one survives? Assuming both have the same resources.
Click to expand...

Is there a 3rd country for moderates?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#6,491
#6,491
InVOLuntary said:
That and all the people that want to contribute to society would end up on the conservative side. The liberal side would end up with only the takers and the few that feel guilty for having anything. Their money would soon evaporate and the walls would come tumbling down.
Click to expand...

It would be exactly like Ayn Rand predicted in Atlas Shrugged.
 
#6,494
#6,494
InVOLuntary said:
Hypothetical:

Take the country and divide it into two countries. Let the Liberals have one and the conservatives have the other. Let people choose which half they want to reside and they have to stay there. Which one survives? Assuming both have the same resources.
Click to expand...

Conservatives survive the longest. They would be able to self sustain longer due to having a true identity but they won't advance as quickly. The liberal side would step in their own foot and crumble. At one point they'll appear to be doing very well but it'll crash down.

jmo
 
#6,495
#6,495
glichtenwalter said:
However, I really wish a viable 3rd party would come along that would challenge the two existing parties to stop their shenanigans. Right now it is just a constant squabble between siblings and the people fail to get good government. I also think Congress should have term limits and that the Congress should meet for three months or so in the summer. They should have to pass the Authorization and Appropriations bills before they do anything else. If they get that done in the allotted time, then they can put other items on the table. The rest of the time they should have to be in their state amongst their constituents.
Click to expand...

Which is why the whole "I didn't even bother to vote, mine won't even count because I know Candidate X will win this state" line of thought drives me absolutely insane.

Give a 3rd party a shot. I did and feel a hell of a lot better about it. It may not "matter" right now but they're trying to build something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,498
#6,498
WallyBalls said:
Which is why the whole "I didn't even bother to vote, mine won't even count because I know Candidate X will win this state" line of thought drives me absolutely insane.

Give a 3rd party a shot. I did and feel a hell of a lot better about it. It may not "matter" right now but they're trying to build something.
Click to expand...
Sounds like our coaching staff.
 
#6,499
#6,499
utvols88 said:
It was also created so only a few States (like Virginia when it was created) don't control the results of the elections.

The issues of the metropolis does not equal the issues of the rural residents. The electoral college is necessary.
Click to expand...

They also didn't have the ability to count the votes in a timely fashion, and there were no national campaigns, just regional.

A lot has changed since the creation of the Electoral College.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,500
#6,500
Dust10 said:
They also didn't have the ability to count the votes in a timely fashion, and there were no national campaigns, just regional.

A lot has changed since the creation of the Electoral College.
Click to expand...

Look. I think we can all agree that I'm right and move on here. :)
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top