2020 Presidential Race

#34,726
#34,726
volfanhill said:
I know you do. That’s why it made my ears perk up. On initial reflection I like it. But I need to ponder on it some more. Thanks for giving me something interesting to consider.
Click to expand...
Poke some holes in it. It will never happen so no skin of my back if it sucks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill
#34,729
#34,729
luthervol said:
They would get a fair say under one person/one vote in my opinion.
Your opinion is that more populated states get a greater voice but not a one person/one vote ratio.
At least you do not think every state should get an equal voice.
Click to expand...
They wouldn't get a fair say under a popular vote because the voices of individual states would be drowned out. In a popular vote, two states could control the outcome of an election. That's not fair to the other 48 states.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#34,731
#34,731
luthervol said:
You seem to be saying that each state should have 1/50 of the input.
If you are, then that could only happen if they each had an equal number of electorates.
I'm confused about how you could be confused by my confusion because you are not being consistent with what you claim to support.
Click to expand...
You are making assumptions in your attempt to put the pieces together. The important piece is the senators are (or should be) appointed to represent the state. Then both states and individuals have representation at the federal level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood
#34,734
#34,734
EU7r8RqUEAAt97c.png
 
#34,735
#34,735
clarksvol00 said:
Nah. I could be having the same argument with Clinton supporters if she won but Trump had a majority of the popular vote.
Click to expand...
I didn't support either, so my view would be the same no matter what. The Constitution is the Constitution.
 
#34,738
#34,738
Weezer said:
They wouldn't get a fair say under a popular vote because the voices of individual states would be drowned out. In a popular vote, two states could control the outcome of an election. That's not fair to the other 48 states.
Click to expand...
So more populated states should have a greater say than less populated states? You're good with that?

Just not a one person/one vote ratio.
 
#34,739
#34,739
@volfanhill in full disclosure, increase the congressional reps isn't my idea. i read it from someone else who hates our bloated government even more than you and i.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill
#34,742
#34,742
McDad said:
You are making assumptions in your attempt to put the pieces together. The important piece is the senators are (or should be) appointed to represent the state. Then both states and individuals have representation at the federal level.
Click to expand...
Maybe we can try it this way....
Do you think the current electoral college system is appropriate?

If so, you think more populated states should have a greater say than less populated states.

If not, how would you change it?
 
#34,744
#34,744
luthervol said:
So more populated states should have a greater say than less populated states? You're good with that?

Just not a one person/one vote ratio.
Click to expand...
I'm good with the system our FFs came up with, that we've used since the Constitution was ratified.
 
#34,746
#34,746
Weezer said:
Are you wanting a conversation or are you just looking to be a smart ass? People have given you answers and reasons. How you interpret them is up to you.
Click to expand...

Basically the only reason I've gotten is that people don't want voters in big cities to have a vote that's equal to people in rural areas. I assume that's because big cities skew liberal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
#34,747
#34,747
luthervol said:
Maybe we can try it this way....
Do you think the current electoral college system is appropriate?

If so, you think more populated states should have a greater say than less populated states.

If not, how would you change it?
Click to expand...
1. Yes.
2. They do have more "say".
2A. repeal 17th amendment; Increase Congressional reps to about 5,000 to 8,000.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill
#34,749
#34,749
volfanhill said:
That’s interesting. I thought you and I were the only ones left with sense. Glad to hear there are three of us.
Click to expand...
I started reading him for his real estate knowledge. Turns out he's a West Point alum, Vietnam vet, and a Havard Business School grad. Interesting fellow
 
#34,750
#34,750
clarksvol00 said:
Basically the only reason I've gotten is that people don't want voters in big cities to have a vote that's equal to people in rural areas. I assume that's because big cities skew liberal.
Click to expand...
I don't care which way they skew. I don't think states should have infinitely more power than other states based simply on population. The idea is that everyone's needs are addressed, not just the most populous places.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top