X
Xystus
Guest
OK, OK… the total count of votes in all 50 states plus DC for presidential candidates. Nit Successfully Picked.
Senate Democrats introduce a constitutional amendment to abolish the
- Status
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Quite the opposite. Winner-take-all is not an example of pure democracy in the election of the President. A minority in a state never gets representation in the electoral college until they become the majority, or join with other groups to form a majority. The decision to have winner-take-all was made by the ruling majority. Winner-take-all is another instance of increasing power to the government.LeafByNiggle:
Why undermine the power that each state holds to determine its choice for president? On the one hand, you are calling for pure democracy, while here you want to outlaw it within the states.
This is another instance of increasing power to the general government.
Since you did not answer my question, I can only assume from what you did say that your answer is yes. In that case the one-person-one-vote principle is the one we hold in common upon which I based by arguments.LeafByNiggle:
Each state already has one person one vote. Yours is a solution seeking a problem.
That’s a description of the electoral college. The 2 lions are the majority of people in a state that favor a particular candidate. The gazelle is the minority in that state who favor the other candidate. What the lions “eat up” is the rights of the gazelle to have it’s viewed reflected in some way in the electoral count.
If that disturbs you then ask yourself why the liberals are a majority in the overall population.
There is move among states to pledge their electoral votes to whoever wins the popular vote. If you are in favor of states rights you should respect the right of states to do this, which will effectively eliminate the electoral college as a factor.LeafByNiggle:
Individual States get to decide how they allocate their electoral votes. States with “winner-take-all” are that way because the State decided to have a “winner-take-all” system. There is no reason for the Federal Govt to eliminate this option for the States if that is what they decided.
L
Lemuel
Guest
There is no popular vote. The popular vote is a myth.
E
Ender
Guest
Yes, there is. It is a move made by states controlled by liberals with the intent of eventually sidestepping the Electoral College since there is no possibility of ever eliminating it via the amendment process. It has nothing to do with whatever is fair and equitable to all parties. It is about consolidating power.
The EC is remarkably fair, and effective for a federal system.
And it is even more egregious voter suppression than a national plebiscite. It demands that, no matter how the population of a state votes, the rest of the nation chooses its electors.LeafByNiggle:
Yes, there is. It is a move made by states controlled by liberals with the intent of eventually sidestepping the Electoral College since there is no possibility of ever eliminating it via the amendment process. It has nothing to do with whatever is fair and equitable to all parties. It is about consolidating power.
The same reason we have legal abortion, infanticide, and gay “marriage”
J
John24
Guest
It’s the laughingstock of the world.
H
humbleseeker
Guest
The electoral college has produced the oldest democracy in the world, founded in the oldest constitution. How is that funny?
G
GKMotley
Guest
But that’s not good enough. The EC is one of the reasons that no one, I mean no one wants to move to this country.
H
humbleseeker
Guest
Is that sarcasm?
www.worldatlas.com
Countries With the Most Immigrants
The United States has the highest immigration population in the world. Learn about other countries that have large immigrant populations.
www.worldatlas.com
G
GKMotley
Guest
Oh, dear.
Did I forget the sarcasm font again?
Did I forget the sarcasm font again?
H
humbleseeker
Guest
This guy helps
G
GKMotley
Guest
Bet he would.
And bet, if we looked hard enough, we could folks trying to move here, even as we type.
Let’s look southward and see.
And bet, if we looked hard enough, we could folks trying to move here, even as we type.
Let’s look southward and see.
P
Peeps
Guest
You have a good point, but realistically, farmers and other rural folks, as well as small towners and flyover small city dwellers are more familiar with life in the Big Cities because of the extensive coverage of city life and the viewpoint of city dwellers on the media, especially television, but also radio and print media.
Many rural folks have at least one relative living in or hear these cities (due to jobs), so they learn about city life (we have a daughter in NYC and a brother-in-law and his family in Chicago.
Also, many rural folks visit the Big Cities for business or sometimes pleasure. I do realize that a visit is not going to give a true picture of everyday life in the Big Cities, but at least they see it and talk to people who live there.
The problem is that the ignorance the Big City dwellers have about life in rural America and the remote states is dangerous–their votes can totally change or even end life in rural areas. An example of this would be policies about cars and driving. Many city dwellers do not own a car, or if they are wealthy enough, own a car and keep it in a garage far away from their apartment. They don’t need a car in the City–they have many public transportation options, along with cabs and ubers. Or they walk–that’s what my daughter does, along with tens of thousands of other New Yorkers.
But in the rural states, people live miles away from the nearest town, and even further away from the bigger cities with more goods and services. Driving is not just an option, it’s a necessity. Any laws made that make driving more expensive negatively impact the daily life of people in these states in a major way.
Driving/car issues is just one small example, and I picked it because it’s easy to explain.
I suggest reading through the U.S. Constitution, where you will find an extensive explanation of why the Electoral College was created. I honestly feel that if the Electoral College were abolished, that there would be a good chance that our country would fragment, and that certain states would advocate breaking away from the Union. I don’t think they would succeed, but I the feelings of resentment would hurt the U.S.
P
Peeps
Guest
If that disturbs you then ask yourself why the liberals are a majority in the overall population.
Xystus:
That’s a darned good question.
I would say that it’s harder in a city to make your own way and survive on your own.
My dad (R.I.P.) always said that if a nationwide crisis occurred, he could survive on his farms, growing and hunting and raising his own food and drinking water from his own well. He would not have to leave his farm to survive.
But in the city–you can’t do that.
So liberalism, which advocates lots of government “helps”, fits big-city life, but liberalism doesn’t go over with rural Americans who are used to making their own way in the world without help other than from fellow farmers.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
The world’s oldest democracy? Not by a long shot. I don’t think you can call it a democracy when half of the population is prohibited from voting by law. That was the case in the US until 1920. But Canada passed women’s suffrage in 1917. Britain, Germany, and Poland in 1918. Austria and the Netherlands in 1919. But Finland was even earlier in 1906. So the chest-pounding is a little premature, and not quite in line with your screen name.
As for the electoral college producing the worlds oldest constitution, it is the other way around. The constitution produced the electoral college. The speculation that the electoral college was somehow instrumental in the US lasting all these years is a bit like the rooster being instrumental in the sun rising each morning. In all likelihood we would be in about the same place we are now if we had direct election of the President all these years.
H
humbleseeker
Guest
Is the US the “oldest democracy” in the world?
When Democratic lawmakers staged a sit-in on the House floor calling for legislative action on gun control, Speaker of t
www.politifact.com
“While the United States is not the first to include elements of democracy, it is the oldest existing nation with a constitutional government in which the people elect their own government and representatives.
We rate the claim True.”
Also:
Is a little personal and not appreciated
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
You are right. I apologize.
Last edited:
- Status