2020 Primaries

[37L1]

The president doesn’t represent certain states, he represents each citizen equally. Hence, each citizen’s vote should count equally.

No he doesn't. Remember:

 

[Orange_Crush]

Trying to insult me personally isn’t a stance, it’s a distraction from the fact that I’m right. I’ll say it slower for your, the person with the most votes winning an election isn’t a radical idea.

I'm literally sitting on the edge of my seat waiting for you to make a persuasive, rational argument for those claims. Sadly, you're yet to do so. So, considering your inability to establish your claims in a shared definition of justice and fairness, we have to go back to the shared definition that we already have--the Constitution. What does it tell us?

 

[AM64]

President Trump was the front runner since he announced, he was always in the middle of the candidates and took punches from everyone and was always cool as a cucumber. On the other hand you have Joe Biden who loses it when a voters questions him on guns and Biden responds by cussing him and telling him he doesn't work for him

I'm predicting some heavy drugs in Joe's system when debate time rolls around.

 

[OHvol40]

So start convincing us for the change. (Hint: A good start would be establishing a common source of justice to base your undefined concept of "fair" on. Lacking a rational and persuasive argument, all we have is the Constitution. What does it say is fair?"

Thomas Jefferson basically said “stop being idiots and don’t look to a bunch of dead guys for answers, figure out your system for yourselves as you evolve”.

Conservative response in 2020: “F evolving”

 

[volfanjustin]

I'm predicting some heavy drugs in Joe's system when debate time rolls around.

If he wins Michigan tonight and it appears he's well on his way to the nomination I am betting he becomes seen less and less for a while. He's unbalanced and not well. It's about time to start an amateur hour thread about his antics.

 

[OHvol40]

I'm literally sitting on the edge of my seat waiting for you to make a persuasive, rational argument for those claims. Sadly, you're yet to do so. So, considering your inability to establish your claims in a shared definition of justice and fairness, we have to go back to the shared definition that we already have--the Constitution. What does it tell us?

You are literally incapable of banter. I guess that’s what happens when you don’t have a leg to stand on.

 

[Bigun]

It's the team with the most points that wins.
Think points = votes. Like in every election or game.

Exvept...when there are rules already in place. If the electoral college is wrong it's been wrong, so ignoring until you get beat is moronic and stupid.

Plus, I'm sure having lower Manhatten and Los Angeles picking our POTUS is a great thing.

 

[Rifleman]

Texas isn't going blue anytime soon no matter how many illegals or California liberals are imported.

It will go blue and should be considered a battleground state right now. The trends and data analytics are very stark and very clear:

* First the big cities went blue, starting with Dallas in 2006 and continuing until Democrats swept them all.
* After showing they can govern the cities, now the suburbs are starting to turn blue, and O'Rourke actually beat Ted Cruz in those areas too.
* Ted Cruz won 67% in rural areas, but barely won overall because only 1 in 4 Texas voters live in rural areas and that share shrinks every year.

Only those immune to data, demographics, common sense, and trend lines believe Texas will be red forever.

The better questions are:

* Can the GOP change its policies, dispositions, and outreach to reverse these trends?
* If not, where can the GOP take roughly 40 EVs from the Democrats? If Florida flips blue, then you'll need about 70.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Thomas Jefferson basically said “stop being idiots and don’t look to a bunch of dead guys for answers, figure out your system for yourselves as you evolve”.

Conservative response in 2020: “F evolving”

I'm literally begging you to help me/us "evolve". I'm literally asking you to make a rational and persuasive argument for the fairness of mob rule democracy. This is your big chance. It's the big stage. The spotlight's on you. Don't **** your pants now that you have the opportunity.

So far you've made bald statements and emotional pleas. What we haven't seen is that rational and persuasive argument that would support the bald claims and emotion.

I'm trying to help as much as I can, but you don't seem interested in receiving it. Nonetheless, I'll try again.

I would recommend working to establish a shared source/fpundation of justice and morals to support your undefined concept of "fair"-ness. Move on from there.

Short of doing so, we have to all go back to our current standard of justice and fairness--the Constitution. What does it say, again?

 

[OHvol40]

I'm literally begging you to help me/us "evolve". I'm literally asking you to make a rational and persuasive argument for the fairness of mob rule democracy. This is your big chance. It's the big stage. The spotlight's on you. Don't **** your pants now that you have the opportunity.

So far you've made bald statements and emotional pleas. What we haven't seen is that rational and persuasive argument that would support the bald claims and emotion.

I'm trying to help as much as I can, but you don't seem interested in receiving it. Nonetheless, I'll try again.

I would recommend working to establish a shared source/fpundation of justice and morals to support your undefined concept of "fair"-ness. Move on from there.

Short of doing so, we have to all go back to our current standard of justice and fairness--the Constitution. What does it say, again?

How is it an emotional plea to point out that literally every American election is done by popular vote... except one.

 

[McDad]

Again, just because it’s what we have doesn’t mean it’s right. There is “no defense necessary” because the people who benefit disproportionately from it prefer not to admit that they get special preference and don’t want to debate fairness... because it’s not fair.

You are within your right to feel about it however you wish. From my seat, it appears you have taken the most jaundiced and cynical view of the established method in an effort to delegitimize the status quo.

What you consider right, or just, or fair is of no concern to me. It has been repeatedly stated by me and others the reasons why it found its way into our system. Those reasons seem fair or just to me.

 

[Orange_Crush]

You are literally incapable of banter. I guess that’s what happens when you don’t have a leg to stand on.

So, you're not interested in that discussion you chided everyone for not having?

 

[volfanjustin]

It will go blue and should be considered a battleground state right now. The trends and data analytics are very stark and very clear:

* First the big cities went blue, starting with Dallas in 2006 and continuing until Democrats swept them all.
* After showing they can govern the cities, now the suburbs are starting to turn blue, and O'Rourke actually beat Ted Cruz in those areas too.
* Ted Cruz won 67% in rural areas, but barely won overall because only 1 in 4 Texas voters live in rural areas and that share shrinks every year.

Only those immune to data, demographics, common sense, and trend lines believe Texas will be red forever.

The better questions are:

* Can the GOP change its policies, dispositions, and outreach to reverse these trends?
* If not, where can the GOP take roughly 40 EVs from the Democrats? If Florida flips blue, then you'll need about 70.

Of course you fail to mention states where Hillary, the most qualified person to ever run won by only a few % points.
When the left says things like "Can the GOP change its policies, dispositions, and outreach to reverse these trends?" That really means please act more like democrats

It's not a battleground state right now, it could be but isn't today. If the Rs continue to nominate good candidates like President Trump then states like Nevada, Colorado, Michigan, PA, Wisconsin can always be in play.

With all that, Trump or no R candidate should take any state for granted

 

[37L1]

You are within your right to feel about it however you wish. From my seat, it appears you have taken the most jaundiced and cynical view of the established method in an effort to delegitimize the status quo.

What you consider right, or just, or fair is of no concern to me. It has been repeatedly stated by me and others the reasons why it found it's way into our system. Those reasons seem fair or just to me.

That's '"just" not "fair."

 

[Orange_Crush]

How is it an emotional plea to point out that literally every American election is done by popular vote... except one.

You've yet to establish why it's unfair to use the EC for presidential elections, no matter what other elections use. You've appealed to some emotional concept of "fairness" without defining its source. You've used appeals to authority, laced with the hope that I'll be embarrassed for not "evolving" (whatever that's supposed to mean.)

I'm asking you to logically establish why it's more fair for the national presidential election to use popular vote than the EC. (Hint: Every other election is far more locally defined. State House... State Senate... State reps... When it makes it to the guy that represents all states nationally, the FFs didn't want a few small geographic locations trumping everyone else.)

 

[37L1]

Thomas Jefferson basically said “stop being idiots and don’t look to a bunch of dead guys for answers, figure out your system for yourselves as you evolve”.

Conservative response in 2020: “F evolving”

He endorsed the framework given to codify the "evolution." Something that you seem to have a big problem with.

 

[JCP201]

About popular vs. electoral. Is the reason why my vote for Biden probably won't count in Georgia because there is a bunch of too far left in California/NY?

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

It had nothing to do with Hillary losing and everything to do with Trump winning.

Bull. squeeze.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Again, just because it’s what we have doesn’t mean it’s right. There is “no defense necessary” because the people who benefit disproportionately from it prefer not to admit that they get special preference and don’t want to debate fairness... because it’s not fair.

Who doesn't want to debate fairness? You've shrank from that debate, my friend.

 

[zeppelin128]

Would you prefer that we arm them with guns, swords, knives, or forks to facilitate things? A debate/duel would be entertaining to say the least - maybe a real way to drain the swamp ... this legislative/judicial approach just isn't cutting it.

 

[Rickyvol77]

It will go blue and should be considered a battleground state right now. The trends and data analytics are very stark and very clear:

* First the big cities went blue, starting with Dallas in 2006 and continuing until Democrats swept them all.
* After showing they can govern the cities, now the suburbs are starting to turn blue, and O'Rourke actually beat Ted Cruz in those areas too.
* Ted Cruz won 67% in rural areas, but barely won overall because only 1 in 4 Texas voters live in rural areas and that share shrinks every year.

Only those immune to data, demographics, common sense, and trend lines believe Texas will be red forever.

The better questions are:

* Can the GOP change its policies, dispositions, and outreach to reverse these trends?
* If not, where can the GOP take roughly 40 EVs from the Democrats? If Florida flips blue, then you'll need about 70.

your mistake is thinking that every generation will be liberal, Generation Z and its predecessor are likely to be much more conservative than the millennial. It is a political shift every 25-30 years and it doesn't ever stay static. Younger generations want to be different than their parents

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

The president doesn’t represent certain states, he represents each citizen equally. Hence, each citizen’s vote should count equally.

Lord have mercy. I'm guessing you are either really young, or can't do math.

At any rate, all you have to do is be patient. With the rates of growth of liberal cities in this countries, at some point they will override the rest of each state population wise and the urban dwelling retards will have their way.

 

[Rifleman]

If I were altering the Electoral College, I would include voter turnout as a portion of the formula for each state.

That way, any state with a low turnout of eligible voters would be at risk of losing an elector back to the pool to be claimed by higher turnout states before the next election.

The effect would be to make each state more prideful about showing up, even if the outcome was a foregone conclusion for them. This would create over time a dynamic where splits between the popular vote and Electoral College would become increasingly rare, if not nearly impossible.

 

[Orange_Crush]

your mistake is thinking that every generation will be liberal, Generation Z and its predecessor are likely to be much more conservative than the millennial. It is a political shift every 25-30 years and it doesn't ever stay static. Younger generations want to be different than their parents

My son rebelled against me by eschewing heavy metal and hard rock in favor of bluegrass.

WTH?

 

[UT_VOLS13]

If I were altering the Electoral College, I would include voter turnout as a portion of the formula for each state.

That way, any state with a low turnout of eligible voters would be at risk of losing an elector back to the pool to be claimed by higher turnout states before the next election.

The effect would be to make each state more prideful about showing up, even if the outcome was a foregone conclusion for them. This would create over time a dynamic where splits between the popular vote and Electoral College would become increasingly rare, if not nearly impossible.

Voter ID?